Hi everyone, So in response to the ongoing discussion about Firewall functionality and the desktop we had a call at the end of last week with some representatives from both the desktop and firewall development teams, trying to figure out a good compromise and a way forward. I hope people can take the time to look over the ideas we discussed and let us know if you think it is a workable solution.
On the call was: Thomas Woerner Matthias Clasen Bastien Nocera Daniel Kopecek Jiri Popelka Peter Vrabec
We had a wide ranging discussion going from what is doable in the Fedora 21 timeframe to what we want from a firewall solution in the long run, what the setup is like on other operating systems, the tradeoffs between security and usability, API and adoption, ease of sharing versus unintended sharing and different corner cases where the different models might break down a bit.
We all agreed on the following core principles * We want users to be as secure as possible * We want users to have their privacy protected as well as possible * We want users to have a good experience using our products * We want users to be able to use services such as DLNA, Chromecast, Avahi and more without having to search on Google, and more often than not be told that the fix is to disable the firewall. * We all agree that there is no perfect solutions on offer here. Just a range of different tradeoffs. A system with a running firewall isn't secure nor is a system without a firewall insecure. Instead they exist on a continium of 'more secure' and 'less secure'.
The challenges seen: * With the current default a lot of services don't work out of the box because the firewall silently blocks them * There doesn't seem to be any non-expensive way for the system to detect that a service is running and being blocked by the firwall. * There is very limited use of the firewalld API for doing things like port unlocking and similar due to it being a predominately Fedora and RHEL only solution currently * Some application developers who do look into using the current API find the API hard to use * The current NetworkManager UI to change zones is both maybe a bit hidden away and also the Zones options listed there are not intuitive or documented in the UI.
Plans for Fedora 21 * The Desktop team will look into creating a UI that asks you when you connect to a new wireless network if you consider it trusted or not. Exact wording of the question and look of dialog etc. will need to be worked out. This setting will be remembered for that network. If user say trusted the zone used will be 'trusted', if not trusted then current default will be used. Should be simple enough to not confuse users, yet improve their security on public networks. * Other connection types will keep the current default which sucks a bit for your home ethernet, but we don't currently have a good way to identify your ethernet connection and popping up a dialog every time you connect is probably a worse user experience than having to google a bit.
Matthias started a prototype of this already here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=727580
Long term plans * Work with NetworkManager team to see if we can come up with a way to identify ethernet connections in a similar manner * Look into proposing a new DBUS API for firewalld * We will keep talking to see if there are more granular approaches that can be developed as we go forward. For many cases the trusted/untrusted question is a bit to simple. For instance you probably trust your work network, but that doesn't mean you want to share your beach vacation photos on the office network. * Look into using the zones descriptions somehow in the NetworkManager Zone setting UI to make it a bit more understanable than just a list of names. FirewallD team will work on making the descriptions internationalizable.
Matthias filed two bugs related to this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091067 split off zone configuration in subpackages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091068 overprotected api
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 04/29/2014 09:40 AM, Christian Schaller wrote:
- Other connection types will keep the current default which sucks
a bit for your home ethernet, but we don't currently have a good way to identify your ethernet connection and popping up a dialog every time you connect is probably a worse user experience than having to google a bit.
One thing we might attempt is to do a UPnP discovery on the ethernet network. Most home routers nowadays have UPnP support and we could use that as a way to determine that you were on a home network. It wouldn't work in all cases, but probably would improve the situation for the majority of users.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.comwrote:
One thing we might attempt is to do a UPnP discovery on the ethernet network. Most home routers nowadays have UPnP support and we could use that as a way to determine that you were on a home network. It wouldn't work in all cases, but probably would improve the situation for the majority of users.
Not really a good idea, coffee shops might have UPnP too, or an attack could set up a small UPnP server to respond to such queries. We can use UPnP to discover network "name" (the name of the UPnP IGD Device) on wired connections, tho.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 09:56:07 -0400, Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
One thing we might attempt is to do a UPnP discovery on the ethernet network. Most home routers nowadays have UPnP support and we could use that as a way to determine that you were on a home network. It wouldn't work in all cases, but probably would improve the situation for the majority of users.
How about tracking the mac address of the router?
On 04/29/2014 08:58 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
One thing we might attempt is to do a UPnP discovery on the ethernet network. Most home routers nowadays have UPnP support and we could use that as a way to determine that you were on a home network. It wouldn't work in all cases, but probably would improve the situation for the majority of users.
How about tracking the mac address of the router?
I think there are some DHCP bypasses out there (ping the default gateway) that would leak the MAC addresses. Do we never want to implement those? They could speed up waking from suspend.
I'm also not sure that clearing the ARP table is properly synchronized with suspend (considering that locking the screen still is not, at least in some dual-monitor setups with F20).
On Apr 29, 2014 9:40 AM, "Christian Schaller" cschalle@redhat.com wrote:
Hi everyone, So in response to the ongoing discussion about Firewall functionality and
the desktop we had a call at the end of last week with some representatives from both
the desktop and firewall development teams, trying to figure out a good
compromise and a way forward. I hope people can take the time to look over the ideas we discussed and let us know if you think it is a workable solution.
On the call was: Thomas Woerner Matthias Clasen Bastien Nocera Daniel Kopecek Jiri Popelka Peter Vrabec
We had a wide ranging discussion going from what is doable in the Fedora
21 timeframe to what we want from a firewall solution in the long run, what the setup is like on other operating systems, the tradeoffs between security and usability, API and adoption, ease of sharing versus unintended sharing and different corner cases where the different models might break down a bit.
We all agreed on the following core principles
- We want users to be as secure as possible
- We want users to have their privacy protected as well as possible
- We want users to have a good experience using our products
- We want users to be able to use services such as DLNA, Chromecast,
Avahi and more without having to search on Google, and more often than not be told that the fix is to disable the firewall.
- We all agree that there is no perfect solutions on offer here. Just a
range of different tradeoffs. A system with a running firewall isn't secure nor is a system without a firewall insecure. Instead they exist on a continium of 'more secure' and 'less secure'.
The challenges seen:
- With the current default a lot of services don't work out of the box
because the firewall silently blocks them
- There doesn't seem to be any non-expensive way for the system to detect
that a service is running and being blocked by the firwall.
- There is very limited use of the firewalld API for doing things like
port unlocking and similar due to it being a predominately Fedora and RHEL only solution currently
- Some application developers who do look into using the current API find
the API hard to use
- The current NetworkManager UI to change zones is both maybe a bit
hidden away and also the Zones options listed there are not intuitive or documented in the UI.
Plans for Fedora 21
- The Desktop team will look into creating a UI that asks you when you
connect to a new wireless network if you consider it trusted or not. Exact wording of the question and look of dialog etc. will need to be worked out. This setting will be remembered for that network. If user say trusted the zone used will be 'trusted', if not trusted then current default will be used. Should be simple enough to not confuse users, yet improve their security on public networks.
- Other connection types will keep the current default which sucks a bit
for your home ethernet, but we don't currently have a good way to identify your ethernet connection and popping up a dialog every time you connect is
probably a worse user experience than having to google a bit.
Matthias started a prototype of this already here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=727580
Long term plans
- Work with NetworkManager team to see if we can come up with a way to
identify ethernet connections in a similar manner
- Look into proposing a new DBUS API for firewalld
- We will keep talking to see if there are more granular approaches that
can be developed as we go forward. For many cases the trusted/untrusted question is a bit to simple. For instance you probably trust your work network, but that doesn't mean you want to share your beach vacation photos on the office network.
- Look into using the zones descriptions somehow in the NetworkManager
Zone setting UI to make it a bit more understanable than just a list of names. FirewallD team will work on making the descriptions internationalizable.
Matthias filed two bugs related to this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091067 split off zone configuration in subpackages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091068 overprotected api -- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktops
Hi Christian, The changes to the firewall policy look good and seems to enable any application to introspect the firewall without needing auth. IMHO, for the time being, that's enough so long as the DEFAULT sharing apps are updated to become aware of this and inform the user of the specific issue. For all others it makes sense to me to create an fdo dbus api for x-desktop use. Given the terms of the prd I don't see the necessity in doing more at this time. Simply, sharing of the sort this would affect, doesn't seem to be a priority given the prd language.
Best/Liam
----- Original Message -----
Hi everyone,
<snip>
Plans for Fedora 21
- The Desktop team will look into creating a UI that asks you when you
connect to a new wireless network if you consider it trusted or not. Exact wording of the question and look of dialog etc. will need to be worked out. This setting will be remembered for that network. If user say trusted the zone used will be 'trusted', if not trusted then current default will be used. Should be simple enough to not confuse users, yet improve their security on public networks.
- Other connection types will keep the current default which sucks a bit for
your home ethernet, but we don't currently have a good way to identify your ethernet connection and popping up a dialog every time you connect is probably a worse user experience than having to google a bit.
Matthias started a prototype of this already here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=727580
The plan has changed slightly after discussions with designers (Allan in particular) and firewalld hackers (Miloslav Trmac and Thomas Woerner).
There were two main uses to the firewall: - Security, this is to avoid particular services from ever being seen on the network This also accounts for packaging errors which mean that unwanted services are enabled when the package is installed, and listening on the network when they shouldn't be, as noticed recently: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1310 - Privacy, avoid unwanted data about the user, or their setup from being broadcast on the local network. That means my user name, my real name (!), the version of my OS, etc.
I reviewed the default network services available on a stock Fedora Workstation installation[1], and we came up with the following plan.
1) Work with QE to setup a way to avoid security regressions, as the rpcbind one, mentioned above. This will mean adding tests at the distro level. Hopefully Tim Flink, CC:ed, can help me with creating those tests 2) Create a new firewalld zone for use by Workstation. This would block all system services (port < 1024) except a few whitelisted ones (see Google spreadsheet below), so as to mitigate #1 3) Add Network awareness to GNOME's controls of system-wide sharing. When disconnecting from the network, or connecting to a new unknown network, we would ensure that all sharing (we can control) is disabled. Each of the possible shared items would be controlled independently for each network. This means that your music would automatically be shared when at home, but disabled when at the coffee shop. We'll also have a way for users to disable sharing that was previously enabled, without that network being the current one. Subject to changes, here are some mockups: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gnome-design-team/gnome-mockups/master/sys... https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gnome-design-team/gnome-mockups/master/sys... In the future this could be further controlled through application sandboxing.
Some things that are currently outside of scope, and will need to be documented: - NFS client or server support. NFS 101 tells you to check the firewall config, you'll still need to do that. - Support for network printers enumeration when mDNS is disallowed on the network (this opens up UDP port 631 on the local machine)
Long term plans
- Work with NetworkManager team to see if we can come up with a way to
identify ethernet connections in a similar manner
This would still be useful: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=723084
Cheers
[1]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/103SAK-7ch5wpGiCP3KF9CYlIhLQFTy9SSvBv...
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Bastien Nocera -
Bruno Wolff III -
Christian Schaller -
Elad Alfassa -
Florian Weimer -
Liam -
Stephen Gallagher