I have no idea but could something like ZeroVM be useful? http://zerovm.org/
On Monday, April 2, 2012, Jenna Fox wrote: > Oh gods not RVM. This setup does not need another layer of complexity. > > On my own server, I use five thins, which run all the time, on a set of > five ports which nginx proxy to. To run hundreds of camping apps, this sort > of persistent setup isn't viable. CGI would work, but could be a little > slow for some more complex applications. A better solution is, in my > opinion, to fork. thins or unicorns could be connected with a simple > camping app which forks on each request, loads a users app in to that > instance, runs it once, then closes. It would be faster than CGI, not too > hard to implement, and wouldn't take more resources to install more apps on > the server. It also makes for a convenient place to run code before the > user's application runs, which maybe useful for sandboxing or setting up > web accessible logging. > > From what I've heard chroot isn't a good way to jail processes - it > doesn't restrict network access, and it's often possible to escape the > jail. Consider this: A script loads the socket library and opens port after > port until computer fails. Disable the socket library? have the ruby > process store a binary inside it, which it saves to a file, sets execute > permission, then runs - it does the same thing. Another attack would be a > fork bomb. > > Security is really complex. How did dot geek deal with it? did you ever > have trouble with malicious users? > > — > Jenna > > On Monday, 2 April 2012 at 1:49 AM, david costa wrote: > > Hello again ! :) > well in theory we can chrot jail users but the best way is to install the > gems that people need perhaps the most used ones. It will then work system > wide ! > The big question is who will be your typical user. If is someone you trust > then you can give them even limited ssh + sftp :) > > Back to my ignorance: how do you folks run camping in a server ? do you > use fcgi ? At work we used to run a fairly big production environment made > of rails running with lighthtp and fcgi. If we were to run this as a dead > simple fcgi setup did anyone set this up? I have tried all the instructions > github on how to set this up with dispatcher.fcgi but failed miserably. > > I would can get the server installed + fcgi but how to run camping apps > from there is a bit of a mystery. > > I am slightly frustrated because of passenger not making a simple create > page/test page http://camping.sh/ working. I know is not the app as it > works at http://camping.sh:3301/ > Unicorn: I think you would be back to have nginx as a reverse proxy for > that which can present some problems for example, default port is 3301 for > camping. So you would need a script to check which port is free and run > then camping --port so seems a bit complicated. > > Thanks > David > > > On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Isak Andersson <icepa...@lavabit.com>wrote: > > Okay then. But then we'd make sure that the applications don't have > privilege to install gems then. > > -- > Skickat från min Android-telefon med K-9 E-post. Ursäkta min fåordighet. > > Jenna Fox <a...@creativepony.com> skrev: > > @Isak Anything run with the `backticks operator` runs with the same > privileges as the process which launched them, if using system level > sandboxing, or if using some crazy sandbox built in to ruby (which probably > wouldn't be very good, but maybe good enough) it'd probably just disable > backticks feature. > > > On 01/04/2012, at 9:31 PM, Isak Andersson wrote: > > Well. Isn't it kind of possible to just hack the gem installation in using > the ruby quotes that execute code on the system. I can't type them on the > phone but I think you know what I mean. Kind of a security issue isn't it? > > Anyways. Perhaps we could offer some Gems to pick from that we think are > quality! (rack_csrf, scrypt). > -- > Skickat från min Android-telefon med K-9 E-post. Ursäkta min fåordighet. > > Jenna Fox <a...@creativepony.com> skrev: > > I don't think we need to go as far as automatically installing gems - > securing ruby is a pretty big challenge, but securing gcc? no way. > > — > Jenna > > On Sunday, 1 April 2012 at 8:25 PM, Isak Andersson wrote: > > Remember that we should pretty much make a Gemfile mandatory if the user > makes use of gems other than Camping. For example, rack_csrf. And we should > make sure that dependencies get installed. :) > -- > Skickat från min Android-telefon med K-9 E-post. Ursäkta min fåordighet. > > Jenna Fox <a...@creativepony.com> skrev: > > Hm. I know the main guy responsible for App Engine, and, well, I certainly > wouldn't build a platform atop it - even aside from the huge glaring issue > that to have an app which can store data persistently, you need to use > google's proprietary database software. > > Heroku doesn't screen against abuse at all. Heroku is not a 'shared > hosting' provider. Their systems use the very finest jailing techniques to > lock the ruby process in to it's own little world. It has no writable > filesystem and it can only read what it absolutely needs to be able to read > to function. All data storage happens over the network on separated datab > > -- ----=^.^=---
_______________________________________________ Camping-list mailing list Camping-list@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list
