Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 16 Feb 2014 23:12:57 +0800
From:      Phil Regnauld <regnauld@x0.dk>
To:        "A.J. 'Fonz' van Werven" <freebsd@skysmurf.nl>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Should I use jail?
Message-ID:  <20140216151257.GP71201@macbook.bluepipe.net>
In-Reply-To: <20140216142824.GA25883@spectrum.skysmurf.nl>
References:  <CAA_8tFq7JNw0=nqz5ByyfJs8cyEu%2B5z%2Bsry=NESViegUSZBJ0Q@mail.gmail.com> <5300C998.7010508@gibfest.dk> <20140216142824.GA25883@spectrum.skysmurf.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
A.J. 'Fonz' van Werven (freebsd) writes:
> Thomas Steen Rasmussen wrote:
> 
> > For what it's worth I never, ever run any service without running it in
> > a jail.
> 
> Smartass comment: if that includes ntpd or a master NIS server, would you
> care to divulge how you did that?

	I don't know why the NIS server would be any different, but for services
	that require access to devices (say, ntpd talking to a GPS over USB), you
	define new devfs rules to unhide the requisite /dev/ entries for the
	jails running the service. I do this for OpenDNSSEC using a smartcard
	reader.

	Here's a devfs.conf entry to make it possible to access BPF (for tcpdump
	among other things - but beware of giving access to raw devices this
	way) and ugen* devices under /dev/

[devfsrules_jail_bpf=5]
add include $devfsrules_jail
add path 'bpf*' unhide
add path 'ugen0.*' unhide

	Cheers,
	Phil



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140216151257.GP71201>