[Adding Stephen back to CC list]
Jozsef Kadlecsik wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Micha? Miros?aw wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:52:52PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Stephen Hemminger wrote:
Is there any strong reason why checking the status of iptables is
restricted?
Vyatta makes a distribution for routers. In our case, we use a non-root
account
for operator commands, and some of the commands are about querying
iptables status.
It seems to be less risky to just fix the kernel to allow non-root user
to query rules
than the current script that uses sudo. Another alternative would be
building a special
restricted command that could be setuid root, but just changing the
kernel seems easiest.
I always thought of it as a privacy thing, similar to restricting
/proc/net/nf_conntrack. But since iptables rules usually don't
allow you to determine active connections just from the packet
counters that might be overkill. So I don't see any real harm
in allowing users to list the ruleset.
At least for iptables, reading of iptables status can be done by making
iptables-save setuid-root. So I think no kernel patching is necessary.
Thats true, but I wouldn't do that since iptables is not the
most trustworthy code.
I'd be more happy with a module parameter and/or proc switch by which this
new feature could be enabled. So backward compatibility could be kept and
the users could list the rules only if the system is explicitly configured
to allow it.
I don't think compatibility is a problem here, lifting this
restriction can't possibly break anything in userspace.
The question is more whether this causes privacy or other issues,
if yes, we shouldn't do it, otherwise there's no harm in doing
in unconditionally. I personally don't see any problems with
this change.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
