From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 049F31FF186 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2025 18:06:54 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C8A6E1E16E; Fri, 1 Aug 2025 18:08:20 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2025 18:07:47 +0200 Message-Id: To: "Thomas Lamprecht" , "Proxmox VE development discussion" From: "Max R. Carrara" X-Mailer: aerc 0.18.2-0-ge037c095a049 References: <20250801154521.594077-1-m.carrara@proxmox.com> <20250801154521.594077-2-m.carrara@proxmox.com> <99a6c3dd-9d62-4586-b819-c7be7e084314@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <99a6c3dd-9d62-4586-b819-c7be7e084314@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1754064453538 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.085 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [shutdown.target] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [RFC pve-firewall v1 1/1] pve-firewall.service: update-alternatives to {ip, eb}tables-nft X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" On Fri Aug 1, 2025 at 6:00 PM CEST, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 01.08.25 um 17:45 schrieb Max R. Carrara: > > Back in c743e671d it was necessary to update-alternative `ebtables` > > to `ebtables-legacy` due to some bugs [0][1]. However, these bugs > > appear to be fixed now. > > Oh, what a throwback ^^ Yeah might be good to change this, but we're > a bit to late for the next release, still see below for a potential > option. > > > > > In Trixie, `ebtables-legacy` seems to cause an enormous amount of audit > > message spam in `dmesg` after upgrading from Bookworm--about 5 long > > lines every ~10 seconds-- making it very tedious to find anything one > > actually cares about. > > > > Thus, use the -nft variants instead of the -legacy ones as the > > aforementioned bugs have since long been fixed and the audit log spam > > is silenced that way. > > > > [0]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=929527 > > [1]: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=929976 > > > > Signed-off-by: Max R. Carrara > > --- > > debian/pve-firewall.service | 6 +++--- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/debian/pve-firewall.service b/debian/pve-firewall.service > > index f95ce6d..c99db26 100644 > > --- a/debian/pve-firewall.service > > +++ b/debian/pve-firewall.service > > @@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ Before=shutdown.target > > Conflicts=shutdown.target > > > > [Service] > > -ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set ebtables /usr/sbin/ebtables-legacy > > -ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set iptables /usr/sbin/iptables-legacy > > -ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set ip6tables /usr/sbin/ip6tables-legacy > > +ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set ebtables /usr/sbin/ebtables-nft > > +ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set iptables /usr/sbin/iptables-nft > > +ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set ip6tables /usr/sbin/ip6tables-nft > > Could we make this opt-in? Then we could a. take more time to thoroughly test > this while b. still being able to tell willing users that they could enabled > the nft variant if they are annoyed by the auditd messages. > > An implementation option might be using an node-local environment file > sourced by the unit file, e.g. > > Environment="VARIANT=legacy" > EnvironmentFile=-/var/lib/pve-firewall/tables-variant > > ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/update-alternatives --set ebtables-${VARIANT} > ... That's a good idea actually! I'll see what I can do on Monday. Also, I forgot to mention: Shoutout to Stoiko for pointing me to that one old commit off-list that sparked the idea of changing to the -nft variants; much appreciated! Would otherwise probably still be poking around in the dark. > > > > > > ExecStart=/usr/sbin/pve-firewall start > > ExecStop=/usr/sbin/pve-firewall stop > > ExecReload=/usr/sbin/pve-firewall restart > _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel