24
submitted 9 months ago by wasabi@feddit.de to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

I'm new to the container world. Does it have any security benefits when I run my applications as a non-root user in a docker container? And how about Podman? There I'll run the container as an unprivileged user anyway. Would changing the user in the container achieve anything?

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] sudneo@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

tl;dr, yes, it does.

Containers are nothing like VMs, and containers in Linux are basically a combination of a feature called Cgroups, which allows to restrict the resources (like memory, etc.) available to a process or group of processes, and namespaces. Namespaces are a construct in which certain namespaced resources are separated from each other, and processes can only see those belonging to their namespace. A simple example is a mount namespace. When you launch a container, you see a / directory which is not the root directory of your system.

Now, the problem is, that not all the resources are namespaced, so there is still quite a lot that processes within containers can do interacting with the main system resources, especially if they are root.

A root process within a container generally can do lots of things that the actual root process can do outside of it. For example, mounting parts of the filesystem (if you run with --privileged), loading kernel modules, etc. Podman can run rootless, in the sense that it uses also User namespaces, meaning a user 0 (root) inside a container is actually mapped to something else outside, but also docker nowadays can do the same.

So yeah, in general, running the applications with the less amount of privileges is a good idea and you should do it whenever you can. Even if you do need some privileges, you should add only the Capabilities needed, not just go straight to root.

[-] NRoach44@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

It means that if someone breaks out of your container, they can only do things that user can do.

Can that user access your private documents (are these documents in a container that also runs under that user)?

Can that user sudo?

Can that user access SSH keys and jump to other computers?

Generally speaking, the answer to all of these should be "no", meaning that each group of containers (or risk levels etc) get their own account.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Process UIDs do the exact same thing.

[-] loudwhisper@infosec.pub 2 points 9 months ago

I have seen this post and decided to respond via a separate blog post. https://loudwhisper.me/blog/containers-isolation/

The short answer is that yes, they do. And yes lowering the privileges of the user helps in avoiding container escapes, which basically makes the other advantages for containers valid. You can, however, achieve the same using (relatively obscure, imho) systemd settings, running with flatpak etc. Namespaces + Cgroups + Seccomp + Capabilities = better security. Containers make it easy to use all of the above.

[-] x1gma@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Imagine your containers as very lightweight mini-VMs. Would you run everything as root in your virtual machines? Containers aren't really that different to classical VMs from an operations point of view. You have a different attack surface, but it is still there, and running as a non-root user inside the container reduces this attack surface, and should IMHO be the default. Privileged containers and users may be required for specific purposes, but should not be the norm, if possible.

[-] ck_@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 9 months ago

This comment shows misunderstanding of what container and virtual machines are and how the technology behind each concept works. Containers are NOT virtual machines, do not treat them as such.

[-] x1gma@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

You're right, containers are not VMs, and I've never claimed that. For the matter of basic unix access control for a beginner they are similar enough to treat them as such. It's enough of a baseline for basic security for a beginners workload imo. For advanced use cases - absolutely do not treat containers as you would VMs.

[-] ck_@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 9 months ago

Container are not a security concept. Hence, running things inside of a container does not provide any security benefits as opposed to outside of the container.

In actual fact, if you take the time to configure you services with proper systemd security features, you get more secure environments than with running generic containers with "just" unprivileged users.

[-] sudneo@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago

Not really true, containers are based on namespaces which have always been also a security feature. Chroot has been a common "system" technique, afterall.

Containers help security if built properly, and it's easier to build a container securely (and run them), compared to proper SystemD unit security.

this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
24 points (96.2% liked)

Selfhosted

38779 readers
369 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS