Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
Can you provide a quick example including Apache configuration bits for
mod_wsgi that uses the option and
description of minimum that needs to be setup in chroot environment to have
Python still work. I presume it just
means making Python installation appear at same location.
Anyway, think I understand what would be required and certainly is an
interesting idea, but just want to make
sure I understand any gotchas.
I'll post reference to this on mailing list as sure this might be interesting
idea for others as well.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 11 Sep 2008 at 4:17
Started conversation at:
http://groups.google.com/group/modwsgi/browse_frm/thread/ca6b414e8bdb0f94?hl=en
Check for comments by others there.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 11 Sep 2008 at 4:22
The chroot option should not be allowed if at point configuration is parsed the
Apache process is not running as root.
Ie.,
else if (!strcmp(option, "chroot")) {
if (geteuid())
return "Cannot use chroot when Apache not run as root.";
...
}
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 11 Sep 2008 at 11:06
For the purpose of experimentation, have implemented this chroot feature. The
option name is called 'root'
though and not 'chroot'. For example:
WSGIDaemonProcess choot-1 user=grahamd group=staff display-name=%{GROUP} \
root=/usr/local/wsgi/restricted-environments/chroot-1
The change is committed at revision 1068 of mod_wsgi trunk.
Whether this feature is kept will depend on being able to provide documentation
on how to use it successfully.
If a simple process can be provided for setting up required chroot environment
with Python and the
application in it, then okay. If not, then probably not much point in providing
it.
Change has been tested for simple hello world application which doesn't import
any additional modules.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 11 Sep 2008 at 11:29
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 11 Sep 2008 at 11:30
Thanks for considering the patch :)
I'm not sure how "root" is better. It can mean many things, and I'd have to
check
the documentation to see what. "chroot" is immediately obvious. *shrug*
I hope the feature (a mere 18 lines!) isn't rejected just because it's not
simple to
document how to setup a chroot environment. That is a complex issue, and I'm
not
sure how an application such as mod_wsgi could possibly document it. How to go
about
it is completely system-dependent. Not just when comparing, say NetBSD vs.
"Linux",
but just compare Debian and Red Hat! With Debian, it's easy with debootstrap.
I
don't know what tools are available for Red Hat. Of course, you can also write
your
own custom automation.
In other words, I think all you're looking for is "setting up a chroot
environment is
beyond the scope of this document" ;->.
Original comment by e...@pretzelnet.org
on 12 Sep 2008 at 5:48
The name of the option can be changed, at the time, 'root' called out to me in
some ascetic way. :-)
As to documentation, If I don't provide some sort of explanation to at least
get people started, then am likely to
continually get questions about it on mailing list. I know from the past how
that can quite easily sap all my time.
Thus am cautious at getting myself into that situation.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 12 Sep 2008 at 7:27
The name of the option can be changed, at the time, 'root' called out to me in
some ascetic way. :-)
As to documentation, If I don't provide some sort of explanation to at least
get people started, then am likely to
continually get questions about it on mailing list. I know from the past how
that can quite easily sap all my time.
Thus am cautious at getting myself into that situation.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 12 Sep 2008 at 7:27
The name of the option can be changed, at the time, 'root' called out to me in
some ascetic way. :-)
As to documentation, If I don't provide some sort of explanation to at least
get people started, then am likely to
continually get questions about it on mailing list. I know from the past how
that can quite easily sap all my time.
Thus am cautious at getting myself into that situation.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 12 Sep 2008 at 7:27
Option now 'chroot' as per original patch. Committed in revision 1069.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 12 Sep 2008 at 10:41
At revision 1070 checked in changes which mean that configuration enabling WSGI
application must reference WSGI script
directly where it is located chroot environment. That is, if:
WSGIDaemonProcess chroot chroot=/usr/local/jail
Then have to be:
WSGIScriptAlias / /usr/local/jail/some/path/app.wsgi process_group=chroot
The mod_wsgi daemon process will strip the leading part of the path
corresponding to chroot directory automatically so
everything works.
This is being forced so as to eliminate/discourage trying to set up parallel
directory outside of chroot directory containing
symlinks into chroot environment, so as to avoid mistakes which would cause
mod_wsgi to fail.
The DOCUMENT_ROOT and SCRIPT_FILENAME variables in WSGI environment are also
adjusted to strip chroot directory from
front. Note that if DOCUMENT_ROOT is outside of chroot directory, then that
variable is simply removed from WSGI
environment.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 13 Sep 2008 at 12:09
At first I didn't like r1070, but then I thought about it, and agree that it's
better. I've switched my 2.3 backport over to this. Thanks.
Original comment by e...@pretzelnet.org
on 13 Sep 2008 at 7:30
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 17 Sep 2008 at 11:05
For example of creating chroot environment for purposes of constructing Python
web application in isolated
environment see:
http://transcyberia.info/archives/12-chroot-plone-buildouts.html
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 17 Sep 2008 at 11:19
Version 3.0 of mod_wsgi now released with this major new feature.
Original comment by Graham.Dumpleton@gmail.com
on 22 Nov 2009 at 2:55
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
e...@pretzelnet.org
on 11 Sep 2008 at 3:50Attachments: