Public bug reported:

With help of AppArmor on 17.04 and 17.10 I've discovered that traceroute
needs net_admin capabilities.

My plan is to update [0] AppArmor profile to fix various DENIED messages
in syslog/audit for traceroute, though I am not sure about allowing, or
denying, net_admin capability.

Looks like traceroute tries to set SO_RCVBUFFORCE and SO_SNDBUFFORCE:

setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)

What is interesting, that traceroute developer does not recall changing
these values [1]. On Debian Sid and OpenSuse Tumbleweed this issue does
not reproduce either.

Could it be some Ubuntu-specific patch in the works? It seems that
traceroute works OK without net_admin...

Thanks!

[0] 
https://code.launchpad.net/~talkless/apparmor/fix_traceroute_tcp/+merge/326260
[1] https://sourceforge.net/p/traceroute/mailman/message/35927818/

** Affects: traceroute (Ubuntu)
     Importance: Undecided
         Status: New

** Description changed:

  With help of AppArmor on 17.04 and 17.10 I've discovered that traceroute
  needs net_admin capabilities.
  
- My plan is to update AppArmor profile to fix various DENIED messages in
- syslog/audit for traceroute, though I am not sure about allowing, or
+ My plan is to update [0] AppArmor profile to fix various DENIED messages
+ in syslog/audit for traceroute, though I am not sure about allowing, or
  denying, net_admin capability.
  
  Looks like traceroute tries to set SO_RCVBUFFORCE and SO_SNDBUFFORCE:
  
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  
  What is interesting, that traceroute developer does not recall changing
- these values [0]. On Debian Sid and OpenSuse Tumbleween this issue does
+ these values [1]. On Debian Sid and OpenSuse Tumbleween this issue does
  not reproduce either.
  
  Could it be some Ubuntu-specific patch in the works? It seems that
  traceroute works OK without net_admin...
  
  Thanks!
  
- [0] https://sourceforge.net/p/traceroute/mailman/message/35927818/
+ [0] 
https://code.launchpad.net/~talkless/apparmor/fix_traceroute_tcp/+merge/326260
+ [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/traceroute/mailman/message/35927818/

** Description changed:

  With help of AppArmor on 17.04 and 17.10 I've discovered that traceroute
  needs net_admin capabilities.
  
  My plan is to update [0] AppArmor profile to fix various DENIED messages
  in syslog/audit for traceroute, though I am not sure about allowing, or
  denying, net_admin capability.
  
  Looks like traceroute tries to set SO_RCVBUFFORCE and SO_SNDBUFFORCE:
  
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [8388608], 4) = 0
  setsockopt(4, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUFFORCE, [8388608], 4) = -1 EPERM (Operation 
not permitted)
  
  What is interesting, that traceroute developer does not recall changing
- these values [1]. On Debian Sid and OpenSuse Tumbleween this issue does
+ these values [1]. On Debian Sid and OpenSuse Tumbleweed this issue does
  not reproduce either.
  
  Could it be some Ubuntu-specific patch in the works? It seems that
  traceroute works OK without net_admin...
  
  Thanks!
  
  [0] 
https://code.launchpad.net/~talkless/apparmor/fix_traceroute_tcp/+merge/326260
  [1] https://sourceforge.net/p/traceroute/mailman/message/35927818/

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1703649

Title:
  Traceroute needs net_admin capability for unknown reason

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/traceroute/+bug/1703649/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to