From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss03@volumehost.net>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Hosted server as distcc machine
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:55:39 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200603231655.39179.bss03@volumehost.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49bf44f10603221510x59e6f1e7n45005ab75afd9d3@mail.gmail.com>
On Wednesday 22 March 2006 17:10, Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote about
'Re: [gentoo-user] Hosted server as distcc machine':
> > > Is there anything wrong with
> > > making a remote machine [a] distcc system?
> >
> > Not really, but you do need to realize that distcc doesn't guarantee
> > that jobs will be sent to the remote machines and will not prevent
> > jobs from being run locally.
>
> Good to know for sure.
I was kinda surprised at the behavior. I was sort of hoping distcc would
just sort of "hold" the job until a slot opened up. It's not a big deal,
but something that you should be aware of.
> > Also, distccd is a wide-open security hole.
>
> Not good. The remote machine I'm considering using distcc on is my
> business's server. I can't have break-ins there.
Then I don't suggest distccd open to the internet (or any public network)
-- it was never designed to be secure. It's not a big target ATM for
hackers AFAIK, but it's still a large vulnerability.
> > It's probably better to use distcc over ssh, using an ssh-agent and
> > PKI authentication.
>
> So using distcc along with ssh and PKI would be sufficient to prevent
> the rooted box mentioned above?
It won't /completely/ prevent it. But, it will bring down the risk
significantly. Random attackers will no longer simply be able to spoof
IPs, instead the attacker will have to have the username and private key
of a user known to have shell access. (Malicious users or a healthy dose
of paranoia may force you to limit shell access anyway.)
> How would ssh and PKI be set up in
> the workflow? It isn't mentioned here:
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/distcc.xml
Yeah, I started with that document, too. distcc/ssh/PKI is not covered,
since it is moderately advanced.
1) On the server, set up the shell account that will use distcc via ssh.
2) On the client, generate the private key for that account and use
ssh-copy-id to give the server the public key. Please, please, give your
private key a good passphrase -- I've seen some people use an empty
passphrase!
3) On the server, if possible, disable password logins to force the use of
the private key for that user.
4) On the client, add a line like shell_account@server to your
distcc_hosts. You can leave out the shell_account part if you want to log
in to the server as the user invoking distcc, but you must include the @
since that's how distcc knows the host is accessed via ssh. You can add
a :port section if the server runs ssh on a port other than 22; You can
add a /limit section (after or in lieu of the :port section) to have the
client limit the number of distcc jobs that will be sent to the server
5) Prior to invoking distcc on the client, start an ssh-agent (I prefer the
keychain "meta-"agent.) and optionally add your private key to the agent.
(If you don't start an agent, each compile that goes to an ssh host will
ask for a password -- very troublesome with parallel make; If you don't
add your private key to the agent, you'll get prompted for the passphrase
the first time you need a key -- still moderately troublesome.)
There is no need to run distccd on the server at all. You /will/ need
sshd.
Remember, since these are standard ssh connections, you'll limit the number
of simultaneous jobs on the server by limiting the number of simultaneous
ssh logins -- not by using any distccd settings.
As far as compile jobs from cron, I just don't suggest them. If you /have/
to use them, have them compile locally. If they /have/ to use your distcc
hosts, you'll have to figure out some way to give your cron jobs access to
your private key without compromising it's security -- not an easy feat.
--
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-23 23:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-21 4:25 [gentoo-user] Hosted server as distcc machine Grant
2006-03-21 4:49 ` Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
2006-03-22 23:10 ` Grant
2006-03-23 22:55 ` Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [this message]
2006-03-24 19:25 ` Grant
2006-03-25 5:03 ` Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
2006-03-27 18:16 ` Grant
2006-03-29 5:13 ` Zac Slade
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200603231655.39179.bss03@volumehost.net \
--to=bss03@volumehost.net \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox