My intent was to limit it to the "secure" interfaces only, but on by default, not running as root, and requiring a username/password to use regardless.
(I am similarly blocking port 81 and the samba ports to the secure interfaces on my next attempt at a release) Other suggestions as to improving security overall - while still improving end to end connectivity greatly appreciated! One of the more controversial ideas discussed on this list earlier was the concept of making the guest network a nearly default free zone, and allowing advanced protocols such as hip, sctp, etc, through on ipv6 by default. On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Can we clarify what this is to be used for? I assume it will be defaulted > off. Not sure I want my router to send messages to people I don't know, or > be reachable by people I don't know. > > > > Anyway, just a personal reaction. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Dave Taht" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 11:09pm > To: "Jim Gettys" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] making cerowrt chattier > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Jim Gettys <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 06/12/2012 10:22 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> I have an awkward worry that the functionality here is expanding to >>> fill all possible space on the machine, so it is less a router than a >>> complete "home appliance". > > I guess I'm way ahead of you guys, and should have just deployed the > thing and awaited feedback. The jabber server I have working runs out > of xinetd (so no memory use when not used), and eats less than 100k of > ram per invocation. For more details on in.jabberd and related tools > see: > > http://inetdxtra.sourceforge.net/ > > There is of course an old aphorism that all programs expand until they > can send mail (which ssmtp can do, btw). While I miss the days where > email was the one constant in the universe, lacking secure > authentication and verification as well as direct p2p access in the > current standards is a real problem that has too many overlapping > means to solve at the present time. > > I miss email direct to my machine. And netnews for that matter. > (cerowrt has leafnode as an optional package btw), but I wasn't > planning to solve that problem this year. > >>> >>> >>> >>> On a machine that has almost no internal isolation capabilities, >>> lurking potential alignment bugs whenever the kernel is updated by the >>> x86 maintainers, vulnerable to the first compromised service, it may >>> be a bit risky to load on to the system every app except the kitchen >>> sink. > > I am concerned about most embedded appliances (not just routers) > running nearly every service as root. While cerowrt takes more steps > than most to remedy this (named is in a jail, the web server doesn't > run as root, etc), more work is needed on the configuration web server > among other subsystems. I wish certs weren't such a PITA, for example. > >>> >>> >>> >>> My personal bias would be to make a darn good router, and leave the >>> other stuff entirely out of the picture. > > My personal bias is toward making a darn good router that *stays one* > and better, improves over time, and that is one motivation towards > making it chattier in some form. Other ideas include adopting a > hip-like protocol to allow remote access to a user selected > independent provider of security services. > > In the time we've been working on cerowrt (well over a year now) there > have been over 8 major CVEs to deal with that I can think of off the > top of my head. Some means of pushing out security updates in > particular, in a sane manner, is needed, and a little user > intervention required now and then. > >> >> I mostly agree with you, particularly when it comes to running a chat >> server. >> >> But we've identified a number of situations where having the router be >> able to inform you of goings ons/events is needed. One other low tech >> solution is sending email, but you also have a configuration problem >> then (as you will for a chat service too, of course, unless you run via >> multicast, and I doubt if anything but a Linux system will receive those >> without fuss). >> >> That's why I sent a pointer to telepathy; it allows you to send messages >> to a bunch of different back ends, and stays out of the server >> business. And it's being used on embedded systems (though I don't know >> if they go as small as what a typical home router is today). >> - Jim > > I will look over telepathy. IRC, as the other major chat standard, would > be nice to support. As well as bonjour. > > > -- > Dave Täht > SKYPE: davetaht > http://ronsravings.blogspot.com/ -- Dave Täht SKYPE: davetaht http://ronsravings.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
