We want to stop systemd from being added to docker images, because of rpm requiring systemctl.

Marcelo Ricardo Leitner marcelo.leitner at gmail.com
Tue Apr 29 18:36:11 UTC 2014

Em 29-04-2014 12:27, Lennart Poettering escreveu:
> On Tue, 29.04.14 10:37, Daniel J Walsh (dwalsh at redhat.com) wrote:
>> On 04/29/2014 06:33 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28.04.14 17:01, Daniel J Walsh (dwalsh at redhat.com) wrote:
>>>> The problem  is lots of services require systemd because they ship a
>>>> unit file and want systemctl reload to happen.  Systemd then triggers a
>>>> require for udev and kmod, which docker containers do not need.
>>> If you discount the docs/man pages of the RPMs, how much does kmod,
>>> udev, systemd actually contribtue in bytes to your docker images?
>>> Lennart
>> Shrinking the the docker image is more then just size.  We want to
>> eliminate packages that are not used (Within reason) to eliminate
>> problems like CVE's.  If udev/systemd/kmod had a CVE we would need to
>> update all Container images.
> Well, if you are this principled maybe. But do note that we dont really
> ship suid binaries (except one binary with fscaps which is
> systemd-detect-virt), and hence by leaving systemd in the image without
> running it should result in no increased attack surface that wasn't
> there anyway... Dead code in the image, that cannot be use to acquire
> new caps isn't much of a security threat...

You're considering only the escalation way to do it, but there are other 
ways to exploit code laying around, like when some web pages don't 
sanitize the URL enough and end up allowing executing something in the 
system, much like sql injection. In those cases, one could craft URLs to 
run wget or any other tool that may help the intruder get even more inside.

It's a pile of faults, yes, but the result isn't good and one good 
preventive step is keeping the dead/not needed stuff away.


More information about the devel mailing list