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 2A46F1FF13B for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:56:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 20A4B168DD; Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:56:06 +0100 (CET) From: Fiona Ebner To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Subject: [RFC firewall 0/3] add triggers for PVE perl code updates Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:54:23 +0100 Message-ID: <20260311105524.50117-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1773226493063 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.064 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 0.408 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 0.819 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 0.903 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 Message-ID-Hash: OE3ZW3OGTH3RZAJ22YWZ7XVY7APRQ3MG X-Message-ID-Hash: OE3ZW3OGTH3RZAJ22YWZ7XVY7APRQ3MG X-MailFrom: f.ebner@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Similar to the services shipped by pve-manager, the firewall service should also be reloaded when Perl packages like libpve-common-perl or libpve-network-perl are updated. There are false positives too, like libpve-storage-perl, and avoiding theses would require a new trigger name specifically for firewall and activating that new trigger in all its dependencies. But maybe that one is the better way? Happy to hear opinions :) A path-based interest is chosen following the same rationale as pve-manager commit 27d1db3a ("triggers: add path-based trigger interest"). Note that this is not prompted by an actual issue I encountered, but I did notice it when the firewall was still running with some manually added logging in Daemon.pm even after reinstalling pve-common. I was surprised and I felt like it's worth discussing whether we want any triggers for the firewall service. pve-firewall: Fiona Ebner (3): d/postinst: handled triggers by reloading service d/pve-firewall.triggers: add interest in PVE perl code updates d/pve-firewall.triggers: drop superfluous pve-api-updates activation debian/postinst | 4 ++++ debian/pve-firewall.triggers | 2 +- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Summary over all repositories: 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) -- Generated by git-murpp 0.5.0