Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding support for non-root containers #1584

Open
wants to merge 45 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

bsobbe
Copy link

@bsobbe bsobbe commented Aug 1, 2023

Steps:

  1. Upgrading s6-overlay to v3.1.5.0 as suggested in this issue in base image.
  2. Refactoring the scripts and making sure they have sufficient permission.
  3. Changing ownerships and permissions of files and directories needed for the service to run.
  4. Running a test call in a non-root k8s environment using services: web, jvb, jicofo, prosody.

Useful links during my process:
https://github.com/just-containers/s6-overlay/blob/master/MOVING-TO-V3.md
just-containers/s6-overlay#539
just-containers/s6-overlay#526

bsobbe added 30 commits July 17, 2023 12:27
@saghul
Copy link
Member

saghul commented Aug 1, 2023

Thanks for getting this started!

Copy link
Member

@saghul saghul left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I made a first round of review, impressive work, thank you!

docker-compose.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jibri/Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jibri/Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jibri/Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jibri/rootfs/etc/services.d/10-xorg/run Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jigasi/Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jigasi/rootfs/etc/services.d/jigasi/run Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
jvb/rootfs/etc/cont-init.d/10-config Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
prosody/Dockerfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ http_interfaces = { "*", "::" }
http_interfaces = { "*" }
{{ end }}

data_path = "/config/data"
data_path = "/config/noroot_data"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't do this please. It will break existing installations for no good reason.

Copy link
Author

@bsobbe bsobbe Aug 2, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is the only way I could get over permission issues while generating TLS certificates by prosody to /config/data.
it appears to me that something sets the permission of /config/data to root no matter what we set it in the Dockerfile. After creating noroot_data and setting the right ownerships, the SSL issue was solved and I was finally able to make a call. otherwise, JVB and Jicofo both failed while trying to reach prosody internally because it doesn't have cert files.

If you have any ideas that can preserve the current setup and still solve the SSL issue with this user I am definitely open to hearing. but I'm curious to know why this will break the existing installations. since the /config/data is still there and the prosody PID is also still in /config/data. this is just changing the data directory to noroot_data to be able to generate SSLs. It appears to me that once the 10-config script is done it will even move the certificates to /config/certs and removes them from noroot_data at the end of the file.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What user does the 10-config script run as? A cursory look at https://github.com/bjc/prosody/blob/master/util/prosodyctl/cert.lua reveals some ownership changes if the user is root. Or maybe we should set prosody_user and prosody_group to the new user on the config file.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The user is noroot, with user and group ids = 1000. I bet that's why it can't create the certs in /config/data since apparently we can't change that one's ownership but it can create the certs in noroot_data and move them to the correct location since it's the owner. I could not find a better way to make this work, so I reverted it back to noroot_data so prosody doesn't break.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But we can configure the prosody user and group with the options I showed above, did you test that? Why can noroot create stuff in /config/data tough?

We need to fix this before this PR can land.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since it uses ~= that line checks if the user is NOT root and is NOT the owner of the certs directory, doesn't it? Maybe try creating the certs directory inside data?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@saghul yes precisely. our uid = 1000 and the owner is root:daemon. therefore we hit that if statement and get the error: The directory /config/data is not owned by the current user, won't be able to write files to it.

I don't see why putting /config/certs directory inside/config/datawould help solve this problem. I feel like there is a misunderstanding about the nature of the issue. Ownership over /config/certs is not the issue here. Ownership over /config/data is the actual problem.
Prosody expects noroot to be the owner of that directory. But, regardless of changing that ownership to noroot in the dockerfile, something always overwrites its ownership to root:daemon. My guess is it has something to do with prosody.pid being there (not actually sure if it can be because of this).

The bottom line is, if we can't use noroot_data as a temp path for generating certificates, we need to find a way to change ownership of /config/data. Otherwise, it will keep trying to write the certs in that one and floods the container log with failed to load TLS certificates errors.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes precisely. our uid = 1000 and the owner is root:daemon. therefore we hit that if statement and get the error: The directory /config/data is not owned by the current user, won't be able to write files to it.

Oh hold on. Why can't we change the permissions of that?

But, regardless of changing that ownership to noroot in the dockerfile, something always overwrites its ownership to root:daemon. My guess is it has something to do with prosody.pid being there (not actually sure if it can be because of this).

Aha. Maybe try with chattr -i ?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@saghul did not work. tried this:
// to install chattr cause it did not exist by default.
RUN apt-get install -y e2fsprogs
// Create /config/data (cause it does not exist at this stage) - change ownership - change attribute and remove immutability.
RUN mkdir -p /config/data && chown -R noroot:noroot /config/data && chattr -R -i /config/data

all of that resulted in:
│ The directory /config/data is not owned by the current user, won't be able to write files to it │
│ The directory /config/data is not owned by the current user, won't be able to write files to it │
│ mv: cannot stat '/config/data/.crt': No such file or directory │
│ mv: cannot stat '/config/data/
.key': No such file or directory

same old same old.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hum, that's very odd, as if the user running prosodyctl is root or something. Can you please take care of the rest of the items and leave this one for last? I'll try to take a look too.

@bsobbe
Copy link
Author

bsobbe commented Aug 3, 2023

I made a first round of review, impressive work, thank you!

Thanks for the detailed review. I made a few changes, cleaned up Dockerfiles, and tried to adapt to the requests as much as possible. feel free to check it out.

@bsobbe bsobbe requested a review from saghul August 3, 2023 08:25
Copy link
Member

@saghul saghul left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good progress! Some some comments. A couple of generic things:

  • Use a single RUN
  • Make the permission fixes geenric with a script if needed so we don't keep repeating that

mkdir -p /config/recordings && \
mkdir -p /home/jibri && chown -R noroot:noroot /home/jibri

RUN chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/cont-init.d && \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These 2 are already done in the base image. Is it necessary?


RUN chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/cont-init.d && \
chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/services.d && \
chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/jitsi && \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this necessary? Even if files are owned by root we can read them, right?

chown -R noroot:noroot /usr/bin

RUN chmod +x /etc/cont-init.d/* && \
chmod +x /etc/services.d/10-xorg/* && \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any chance we can use wildcards to use a single command here?

COPY rootfs/ /
COPY --chown=noroot:noroot rootfs/ /

RUN chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/cont-init.d && \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same, is this necessary? If it is, which I'd like you to double-check, let's a script in the base image which all mages call, instead of duplicating the code on each of them.

chown -R noroot:noroot /usr/share/jicofo && \
chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/jitsi && \
chown -R noroot:noroot /etc/jitsi/jicofo && \
mkdir -p /config && chown -R noroot:noroot /config
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This should go on the base image.

COPY --chown=noroot:noroot --from=builder /usr/local/lib/lua/5.4 /usr/local/lib/lua/5.4
COPY --chown=noroot:noroot --from=builder /usr/local/share/lua/5.4 /usr/local/share/lua/5.4

RUN mkdir -pm777 /var/run/saslauthd && \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please use a single RUN block, here and elsewhere.

@@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ http_interfaces = { "*", "::" }
http_interfaces = { "*" }
{{ end }}

data_path = "/config/data"
data_path = "/config/noroot_data"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But we can configure the prosody user and group with the options I showed above, did you test that? Why can noroot create stuff in /config/data tough?

We need to fix this before this PR can land.

@saghul
Copy link
Member

saghul commented Sep 12, 2023

I've just had an idea about the certificate generation @bsobbe . We could stop using prosodyctl to generate them and use the openssl command line instead.

@saghul
Copy link
Member

saghul commented Nov 14, 2023

@bsobbe do you intend to pick this back up?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants