trying out older (read-only, noexec, mount) security methods
fedora at westexe.demon.co.uk
Fri Nov 11 13:43:01 UTC 2005
> A read-only /usr sounds like more trouble than it's worth: it *will*
> break yum updates. So you'll have to regularly remount it read-write
> (while the system's on-line) to update the machine.
> Yes, that had been on my mind. I don't know if anything else writes to
If it does, it's not compliant with the FHS (Filesystem Hierarchy
Standard) to which most Linux distributions aim:
/usr is shareable, read-only data. That means that /usr should be
shareable between various FHS-compliant hosts and must not be
Except for stuff like yum, apt, rpm and make install, if it writes to
/usr, it's a bug (or possibly an installation error if it isn't
installed through RPM).
> Well, I've found my first problem: Mounting /var with "noexec" means
> that CGI scripts won't run for the web server. Took me a few minutes of
> headscratching to realise what had gone wrong, as is the way when the
> problem happens some time after a change. I've temporarily removed
> "noexec" while I consider if I should move the /var/www/cgi-bin/
> directory out of /var.
Well, that explains why I haven't found the problem...
FHS suggests /srv instead of /var:
/srv contains site-specific data which is served by this system. ...
so that services which require a single tree for readonly data,
writable data and scripts (such as cgi scripts) can be reasonably
I don't know if SELinux has rules for it yet.
Hope this helps,
E-mail address: james | My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
@westexe.demon.co.uk | To children ardent for some desperate glory,
| The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
| Pro patria mori. -- Wilfred Owen
More information about the users