Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Oct 2010 21:48:08 +0100
From:      krad <kraduk@gmail.com>
To:        doug@safeport.com
Cc:        Matthew Law <matt@webcontracts.co.uk>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Jail question
Message-ID:  <AANLkTi=XkhH38-T03QWpCZO33Xq76C5vZLGnhLKssayG@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1010141402280.86531@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <a326819258145be7f52702ca68402e23.squirrel@www.webcontracts.co.uk> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1010141402280.86531@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 October 2010 19:19, doug <doug@fledge.watson.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Oct 2010, Matthew Law wrote:
>
>  I have a single box on which I would like to run openvpn, smtp (postfix,
>> dspam, greylist, clamav), imap (dovecot) apache22 and bind.  This box also
>> acts as a network gateway so it would give an attacker carte blanche to
>> the internal nets if it was compromised, which makes me nervous.  The plan
>> is to run openvpn as the only unjailed service and the rest of the
>> services in a single jail or their own jails.
>>
>> I have never touched jails before and I'm a bit unsure of the best way to
>> go.  I realise that I can jail a service or a copy of the whole system
>> (service would be preferable for space efficiency) but I am unclear on how
>> to deal with IP addresses in jailed environments and if I should create
>> individual jails or a single jail for all services.  At the moment I am
>> leaning toward a single system jail for everything so I can keep the space
>> in which openvpn runs as uncluttered as possible and also have a single
>> postgres instance shared by the other services.  Basically, if any of the
>> public services in the jail are compromised I would like to make it very
>> hard for the attacker to see the internal network.
>>
>> If I use this scheme must I use separate public IPs for openvpn and the
>> services jail or is it possible to use a single IP or some NAT/PAT scheme?
>> -this box currently has 4 x NICs split into 2x lagg interfaces in failover
>> mode (one public, one private), if that makes any difference....
>>
>> Sorry for the rambling question and I hope this makes sense!
>>
>> Matt.
>>
>>
> Starting with FreeBSD 8 jails may have multiple IPs and can use sockets.
> AFAIK this makes a jail pretty much like a separate physical system in a
> functional sense. Between man jail and the handbook there is a clear
> explaination of the management and setup procedures. Hopefully those with a
> better understanding of the internals will weigh in with the liabilities for
> what you want to do.
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "
> freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"o
>

how ever you decide to do it have a look a qjail, as its a good managment
tool especially if you have multiple jails



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTi=XkhH38-T03QWpCZO33Xq76C5vZLGnhLKssayG>