Alexander Leidinger

Just another weblog

May
26

New users in Solaris 10 branded zones on Solaris 11 not han­dled automatically

A col­league noticed that on a Solaris 11 sys­tem a Solaris 10 branded zone “gains” two new dae­mons which are run­ning with UID 16 and 17. Those users are not auto­mat­i­cally added to /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow (and /etc/group)… at least not when the zones are imported from an exist­ing Solaris 10 zone.

I added the two users (netadm, netcfg) and the group (netadm) to the Solaris 10 branded zones by hand (copy&paste of the lines in /etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, /etc/group + run pwconv) for our few Solaris 10 branded zones on Solaris 11.

GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…
GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…
Share/Save

May
26

Increase of DNS requests after a crit­i­cal patch update of Solaris 10

Some weeks ago we installed crit­i­cal patch updates (CPU) on a Solaris 10 sys­tem (inter­nal sys­tem, a year of CPU to install, noth­ing in it affect­ing us or was con­sid­ered a secu­rity risk, we decided to apply this one regard­less to not fall behind too much). After­wards we noticed that two zones are doing a lot of DNS requests. We noticed this already before the zones went into pro­duc­tion and we con­fig­ured a pos­i­tive time to live in nscd.conf for “hosts”. Addi­tion­ally we noticed a lot of DNS requests for IPv6 addresses (AAAA lookups), while absolutely no IPv6 address is con­fig­ured in the zones (not even for local­host… and those are exclu­sive IP zones). Appar­ently with one of the patches in the CPU the behav­iour changed regard­ing the caching, I am not sure if we had the AAAA lookups before.

Today I got some time to debug this. After adding caching of “ipn­odes” in addi­tion to “hosts” (and I con­fig­ured a neg­a­tive time to live for both at the same time), the DNS requests came down to a sane amount.

For the AAAA lookups I have not found a solu­tion. By my read­ing of the doc­u­men­ta­tion I would assume there are not IPv6 DNS lookups if there is not IPv6 address configured.

GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…
GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…

Mar
16

Sta­tus crypto cards HOWTO: prob­lems with the card reader (sup­port could be better)

After hours (spread over weeks) I come to the con­clu­sion that there is a lot of poten­tial to improve the doc­u­men­ta­tion of card read­ers (but I doubt the card reader ven­dors will do it) and of the pcsc doc­u­men­ta­tion. It is not easy to arrive at a point where you under­stand every­thing. The com­pat­i­bil­ity list does not help much, as the card read­ers are partly past their end of life and the mod­els which replace them are not listed. Respec­tively the one I bought does not sup­port all the fea­tures I need. I even ported the dri­ver to FreeBSD (not com­mit­ted, I wanted to test every­thing first) and a lot of stuff works, but one crit­i­cal part is that I can not store a cer­tifi­cate on the crypto card as the card reader or the dri­ver  does not sup­port extended APDUs (needed to trans­fer more than 255 bytes to the card reader).

Well, the sta­tus so far:

  • I have a HOWTO what to install to use crypto cards in FreeBSD
  • I have a HOWOT what to install / con­fig­ure in Windows
  • I have a HOWTO regard­ing cre­at­ing keys on a openpgp v2 card and how to use this key with ssh on FreeBSD (or any other unix-like OS which can run pcsc)
  • I have a card reader which does not sup­port extended APDUs
  • I want to make sure what I write in the HOW­TOs is also suit­able for the use with Win­dows / PuTTY
  • it seems Win­dows needs a cer­tifi­cate and not only a key when using the Win­dows CAPI (using the ven­dor sup­plied card reader dri­ver) in PuTTY-CSC (works at work with a USB token)
  • the pcsc pkcs11 Win­dows DLL is not suit­able yet for use on Win­dows 8 64bit
  • I con­tacted the card reader ven­dor if the card reader or the dri­ver is the prob­lem regard­ing the extended APDUs
  • I found prob­lems in gpg4win / pcsc on Win­dows 8
  • I have send some money to the devel­op­ers of gpg4win to sup­port their work (if you use gnupg on Win­dows, try to send a few units of money to them, the work stag­nated as they need to spend their time for paid work)

So either I need a new card reader, or have to wait for an update of the linux dri­ver of the ven­dor… which prob­a­bly means it may be a lot faster to buy a new card reader. When look­ing for one with at least a PIN pad, I either do not find any­thing which is listed as sup­ported by pcsc on the ven­dor pages (it is incred­i­ble how hard it is to nav­i­gate the web­sites of some com­pa­nies… a lot of buzz­words but no way to get to the real prod­ucts), or they only list updated mod­els where I do not know if they will work.

When I have some­thing which works with FreeBSD and Win­dows, I will pub­lish all the HOW­TOs here at once.

GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…
GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…

Jan
15

Com­plete net­work loss on Solaris 10u10 CPU 2012-10 on vir­tu­al­ized T4-2

The prob­lem I see at work: A T4-2 with 3 guest LDOMs, vir­tu­al­ized disks and net­works lost the com­plete net­work con­nec­tiv­ity “out of the blue” once, and maybe “spo­radic” directly after a cold boot. After a lot of dis­cus­sion with Ora­cle, I have the impres­sion that we have two prob­lems here.

1st prob­lem:
Total net­work loss of the machine (no zone or guest LDOM or the pri­mary LDOM was able to have receive or send IP pack­ets). This hap­pened once. No idea how to repro­duce it. In the logs we see the mes­sage “[ID 920994 kern.warning] WARNING: vnetX: exceeded num­ber of per­mit­ted hand­shake attempts (5) on chan­nel xxx”. Accord­ing to Ora­cle this is sup­posed to be fixed in 148677 – 01 which will come with Solaris 10u11. They sug­gested to use a vsw inter­face instead of a vnet inter­face on the pri­mary domain to at least lower the prob­a­bil­ity of this prob­lem hit­ting us. They were not able to tell us how to repro­duce the prob­lem (seems to be a race con­di­tion, at least I get this impres­sion based upon the descrip­tion of the Ora­cle engi­neer han­dling the SR). Only a reboot helped to get the prob­lem solved. I was told we are the only client which reported this kind of prob­lem, the patch for this prob­lem is based upon an inter­nal bugre­port from inter­nal tests.

2nd prob­lem:
After cold boots some­times some machines (not all) are not able to con­nect to an IP on the T4. A reboot helps, as does remov­ing an inter­face from an aggre­gate and directly adding it again (see below for the sys­tem con­fig). To try to repro­duce the prob­lem, we did a lot of warm reboots of the pri­mary domain, and the prob­lem never showed up. We did some cold reboots, and the prob­lem showed up once.

In case some­one else sees one of those prob­lems on his machines too, please get in con­tact with me to see what we have in com­mon to try to track this down fur­ther and to share info which may help in maybe repro­duc­ing the problems.

Sys­tem setup:

  • T4-2 with 4 HBAs and 8 NICs (4 * igb on-board, 4 * nxge on addi­tional net­work card)
  • 3 guest LDOMs and one io+control domain (both in the pri­mary domain)
  • the guest LDOMs use SAN disks over the 4 HBAs
  • the pri­mary domain uses a mir­rored zpool on SSDs
  • 5 vswitch in the hypervisor
  • 4 aggre­gates (aggr1 — aggr4 with L2-policy), each one with one igb and one nxge NIC
  • each aggre­gate is con­nected to a sep­a­rate vswitch (the 5th vswitch is for machine-internal communication)
  • each guest LDOM has three vnets, each vnets con­nected to a vswitch (1 guest LDOM has aggr1+2 only for zones (via vnets), 2 guest LDOMs have aggr 3+4 only for zones (via vnets), and all LDOMs have aggr2+3 (via vnets) for global-zone com­mu­ni­ca­tion, all LDOMs are addi­tion­ally con­nected to the machine-internal-only vswitch via the 3rd vnet)
  • pri­mary domain uses 2 vnets con­nected to the vswitch which is con­nected to aggr2 and aggr3 (con­sis­tency with the other LDOMs on this machine) and has no zones
  • this means each entity (pri­mary domain, guest LDOMs and each zone) has two vnets in and those two vnets are con­fig­ured in a link-based IPMP setup (vnet-linkprop=phys-state)
  • each vnet has VLAN tag­ging con­fig­ured in the hyper­vi­sor (with the zones being in dif­fer­ent VLANs than the LDOMs)

The pro­posed change by Ora­cle is to replace the 2 vnet inter­faces in the pri­mary domain with 2 vsw inter­faces (which means to do VLAN tag­ging in the pri­mary domain directly instead of in the vnet con­fig). To have IPMP work­ing this means to have vsw-linkprop=phys-state. We have two sys­tems with the same setup, on one sys­tem we already changed this and it is work­ing as before. As we don’t know how to repro­duce the 1st prob­lem, we don’t know if the prob­lem is fixed or not, respec­tively what the prob­a­bil­ity is to get hit again by this problem.

Ideas / sug­ges­tions / info welcome.

GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…
GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…

Nov
25

Which crypto card to use with FreeBSD (ssh/gpg)

The recent secu­rity inci­dent trig­gered a dis­cus­sion how to secure ssh/gpg keys.

One way I want to focus on here (because it is the way I want to use at home), is to store the keys on a crypto card. I did some research for suit­able crypto cards and found one which is called Feit­ian PKI Smart­card, and one which is called OpenPGP card. The OpenPGP card also exists in a USB ver­sion (basi­cally a small ver­sion of the card is already inte­grated into a small USB card reader).

The Feit­ian card is reported to be able to han­dle RSA keys upto 2048 bits. They do not seem to han­dle DSA (or ECDSA) keys. The smart­card quick starter guide they have  (the Tun­ing smart­card file sys­tem part) tells how to change the para­me­ters of the card to store upto 9 keys on it.

The spec of the OpenPGP card tells that it sup­ports RSA keys upto 3072 bits, but there are reports that it is able to han­dle RSA keys upto 4096 bits (you need to have at least GPG 2.0.18 to han­dle that big keys on the crypto card). It looks to me like the card is not han­dle DSA (or ECDSA) cards. There are only slots for upto 3 keys on it.

If I go this way, I would also need a card reader. It seems a class 3 one (hard­ware PIN pad and dis­play) would be the most “future-proof” way to go ahead. I found a Reiner SCT cyber­Jack sec­oder card reader, which is believed to be sup­ported by OpenSC and seems to be a good bal­ance between cost and fea­tures of the Reiner SCT card readers.

If any­one read­ing this can sug­gest a bet­ter crypto card (keys upto 4096 bits, more than 3 slots, and/or DSA/ECDSA  sup­port), or a bet­ter card reader, or has any prac­ti­cal expe­ri­ence with any of those com­po­nents on FreeBSD, please add a comment.

GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…
GD Star Rat­ing
load­ing…