Re: Inherent insecurity of OSD daemons when using only a "public network"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 13-1-2017 09:07, Christian Balzer wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Something I came across a while agao, but the recent discussion here
> jolted my memory.
> 
> If you have a cluster configured with just a "public network" and that
> network being in RFC space like 10.0.0.0/8, you'd think you'd be "safe",
> wouldn't you?
> 
> Alas you're not:
> ---
> root@ceph-01:~# netstat -atn |grep LIST |grep 68
> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:6813            0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:6814            0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 10.0.0.11:6815          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 10.0.0.11:6800          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:6801            0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 0.0.0.0:6802            0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> etc..
> ---
> 
> Something that people most certainly would NOT expect to be the default
> behavior.
> 
> Solution, define a complete redundant "cluster network" that's identical
> to the public one and voila:
> ---
> root@ceph-02:~# netstat -atn |grep LIST |grep 68
> tcp        0      0 10.0.0.12:6816          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 10.0.0.12:6817          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> tcp        0      0 10.0.0.12:6818          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN     
> etc.
> ---
> 
> I'd call that a security bug, simply because any other daemon on the
> planet will bloody bind to the IP it's been told to in its respective
> configuration.

I do agree that this would not be the expected result if one specifies
specific addresses. But it could be that this is how is was designed.

I have been hacking a bit in the networking code, and my more verbose
code (HEAD) tells me:
1: starting osd.0 at - osd_data td/ceph-helpers/0 td/ceph-helpers/0/journal
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045275 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6800/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045429 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6800/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045603 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6801/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045669 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6800/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045715 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6801/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045758 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6802/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045810 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6800/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045857 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6801/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045903 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6802/0
1: 2017-01-13 12:24:02.045997 b7dc000 -1  Processor -- bind:119 trying
to bind to 0.0.0.0:6803/0

So binding factually occurs on 0.0.0.0.

Here in sequence are bound:
  Messenger *ms_public = Messenger::create(g_ceph_context,
  Messenger *ms_cluster = Messenger::create(g_ceph_context,
  Messenger *ms_hbclient = Messenger::create(g_ceph_context,
  Messenger *ms_hb_back_server = Messenger::create(g_ceph_context,
  Messenger *ms_hb_front_server = Messenger::create(g_ceph_context,
  Messenger *ms_objecter = Messenger::create(g_ceph_context,

But a specific address indication is not passed.

I have asked on the dev-list if this is the desired behaviour.
And if not I'll if I can come up with a fix.

--WjW
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com



[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux