I have followed this guide:
https://support.nagios.com/kb/article/nagios-core-performance-graphs-using-influxdb-nagflux-grafana-histou-802.html#Nagflux_Config
Already have pnp4nagios running on the server (Debian 9). But I can't get any further, busy for weeks to try to get this fixed.
I am stuck at this point:
Verify Nagflux Is Working
Execute the following query to verify that InfluxDB is being populated with Nagios performance data:
curl -G "http://localhost:8086/query?db=nagflux&pretty=true" --data-urlencode "q=show series"
When I execute that command I get this:
{
"results": [
{}
]
}
Already done this on another distro (CentOS 8), still not results.
But when I execute this command (earlier in the documentation)
curl -G "http://localhost:8086/query?pretty=true" --data-urlencode "q=show databases"
This works:
{
"results": [
{
"series": [
{
"name": "databases",
"columns": [
"name"
],
"values": [
[
"_internal"
],
[
"nagflux"
]
]
}
]
}
]
}
I can add the InfluxDB datasource succesfully in Grafana but I can not select any data when I try so select it from the field "FROM".
It's only showing:
Default
Autogen
So I am very curious what am I doing wrong, normally the documentation from Nagios support works very good.
Thank you big time for reading my issue :).
As you already have PNP4Nagios installed, https://support.nagios.com/kb/article/nagios-core-using-grafana-with-pnp4nagios-803.html would be more apropriate solution for you.
/usr/local/nagios/etc/nagios.cfg has different host_perfdata_file_processing_command when you try to fill influxdb (with nagflux) instead of using Grafana with PNP4Nagios.
You don't need another server. I have Nagios Core, InfluxDB, Nagflux, Histou and Grafana working on same machine.
And you don't have to uninstal PNP4Nagios, just stop & disable service on boot: systemctl stop npcd.service && systemctl disable npcd.service.
After that you have to edit nagios.cfg according to: https://support.nagios.com/kb/article/nagios-core-performance-graphs-using-influxdb-nagflux-grafana-histou-802.html#Nagios_Command_Config to change host_perfdata_file_processing_command value, and change format of *_perfdata_file_template.
Then define process-host-perfdata-file-nagflux & process-service-perfdata-file-nagflux commands in commands.cfg.
If you did like described above, after minute you should see changes in your nagflux database.
Install influxdb-client, then:
influx
use nagflux
SELECT * FROM METRICS
You should see your database loading :)
When I try to create an Azure container instance for EJBCA-ce I get an error and cannot see any logs.
I expect the following result :
But I get the following error :
Failed to start container my-azure-container-resource-name, Error response: to create containerd task: failed to create container e9e48a_________ffba97: guest RPC failure: failed to find user by uid: 10001: expected exactly 1 user matched '0': unknown
Some context:
I run the container on azure cloud container instance
I tried
from ARM template
from Azure Portal.
with file share mounted
with database env variable
without any env variables
It runs fine locally using the same env variable (database configuration).
It used to run with the same configuration a couple weeks ago.
Here are some logs I get when I attach the container group from az cli.
(count: 1) (last timestamp: 2020-11-03 16:04:32+00:00) pulling image "primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3"
(count: 1) (last timestamp: 2020-11-03 16:04:37+00:00) Successfully pulled image "primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3"
(count: 28) (last timestamp: 2020-11-03 16:27:52+00:00) Error: Failed to start container aci-pulsy-ccm-ejbca-snd, Error response: to create containerd task: failed to create container e9e48a06807fba124dc29633dab10f6229fdc5583a95eb2b79467fe7cdffba97: guest RPC failure: failed to find user by uid: 10001: expected exactly 1 user matched '0': unknown
An extract of the dockerfile from dockerhub
I suspect the issue might be related to the commands USER 0 and USER 10001 we found several times in the dockerfile.
COPY dir:89ead00b20d79e0110fefa4ac30a827722309baa7d7d74bf99910b35c665d200 in /
/bin/sh -c rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-CentOS-7
CMD ["/bin/bash"]
USER 0
COPY dir:893e424bc63d1872ee580dfed4125a0bef1fa452b8ae89aa267d83063ce36025 in /opt/primekey
COPY dir:756f0fe274b13cf418a2e3222e3f6c2e676b174f747ac059a95711db0097f283 in /licenses
USER 10001
CMD ["/opt/primekey/wildfly-14.0.1.Final/bin/standalone.sh" "-b" "0.0.0.0"
MAINTAINER PrimeKey Solutions AB
ARG releaseTag
ARG releaseEdition
ARM template
{
"type": "Microsoft.ContainerInstance/containerGroups",
"apiVersion": "2019-12-01",
"name": "[variables('ejbcaContainerGroupName')]",
"location": "[parameters('location')]",
"tags": "[variables('tags')]",
"dependsOn": [
"[resourceId('Microsoft.DBforMariaDB/servers', variables('ejbcaMariadbServerName'))]",
"[resourceId('Microsoft.DBforMariaDB/servers/databases', variables('ejbcaMariadbServerName'), variables('ejbcaMariadbDatabaseName'))]"
],
"properties": {
"sku": "Standard",
"containers": [
{
"name": "[variables('ejbcaContainerName')]",
"properties": {
"image": "primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3",
"ports": [
{
"protocol": "TCP",
"port": 443
},
{
"protocol": "TCP",
"port": 8443
}
],
"environmentVariables": [
{
"name": "DATABASE_USER",
"value": "[concat(parameters('mariadbUser'),'#', variables('ejbcaMariadbServerName'))]"
},
{
"name": "DATABASE_JDBC_URL",
"value": "[variables('ejbcaEnvVariableJdbcUrl')]"
},
{
"name": "DATABASE_PASSWORD",
"secureValue": "[parameters('mariadbAdminPassword')]"
}
],
"resources": {
"requests": {
"memoryInGB": 1.5,
"cpu": 2
}
}
,
"volumeMounts": [
{
"name": "certificates",
"mountPath": "/mnt/external/secrets"
}
]
}
}
],
"initContainers": [],
"restartPolicy": "OnFailure",
"ipAddress": {
"ports": [
{
"protocol": "TCP",
"port": 443
},
{
"protocol": "TCP",
"port": 8443
}
],
"type": "Public",
"dnsNameLabel": "[parameters('ejbcaContainerGroupDNSLabel')]"
},
"osType": "Linux",
"volumes": [
{
"name": "certificates",
"azureFile": {
"shareName": "[parameters('ejbcaCertsFileShareName')]",
"storageAccountName": "[parameters('ejbcaStorageAccountName')]",
"storageAccountKey": "[parameters('ejbcaStorageAccountKey')]"
}
}
]
}
}
It runs fine on my local machine on linux (ubuntu 20.04)
docker run -it --rm -p 8080:8080 -p 8443:8443 -h localhost -e DATABASE_USER="mymaridbuser#my-db" -e DATABASE_JDBC_URL="jdbc:mariadb://my-azure-domain.mariadb.database.azure.com:3306/ejbca?useSSL=true" -e DATABASE_PASSWORD="my-pwd" primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3
In the EJBCA-ce container image, I think they are trying to provide an user different than root to run the EJBCA server. According to the Docker documentation:
The USER instruction sets the user name (or UID) and optionally the user group (or GID) to use when running the image and for any RUN, CMD and ENTRYPOINT instructions that follow it in the Dockerfile
In the Dockerfile they reference two users, root, corresponding to UID 0, and another one, with UID 10001.
Typically, in Linux and UNIX systems, UIDs can be organized in different ranges: it is largely dependent on the concrete operating system and user management praxis, but it is very likely that the first user account created in a linux system will be assigned to UID 1001 or 10001, like in this case. Please, see for instance the UID entry in wikipedia or this article.
AFAIK, the USER indicated does not need to exist in your container to run it correctly: in fact, if you run it locally, it will start without further problem.
The user with UID 10001 will be actually setup in your container by the script that is run in the CMD defined in the Dockerfile, /opt/primekey/bin/start.sh, by this code fragment:
if ! whoami &> /dev/null; then
if [ -w /etc/passwd ]; then
echo "${APPLICATION_NAME}:x:$(id -u):0:${APPLICATION_NAME} user:/opt:/sbin/nologin" >> /etc/passwd
fi
fi
Please, be aware that APPLICATION_NAME in this context takes the value ejbca and that the user which runs this script, as indicated in the Dockerfile, is 10001. That will be the value provided by the command id -u in this code.
You can verify it if you run your container locally:
docker run -it -p 8080:8080 -p 8443:8443 -h localhost primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3
And initiate bash into it:
docker exec -it container_name /bin/bash
If you run whoami, it will tell you ejbca.
If you run id it will give you the following output:
uid=10001(ejbca) gid=0(root) groups=0(root)
You can verify the user existence in the /etc/passwd as well:
bash-4.2$ cat /etc/passwd
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
bin:x:1:1:bin:/bin:/sbin/nologin
daemon:x:2:2:daemon:/sbin:/sbin/nologin
adm:x:3:4:adm:/var/adm:/sbin/nologin
lp:x:4:7:lp:/var/spool/lpd:/sbin/nologin
sync:x:5:0:sync:/sbin:/bin/sync
shutdown:x:6:0:shutdown:/sbin:/sbin/shutdown
halt:x:7:0:halt:/sbin:/sbin/halt
mail:x:8:12:mail:/var/spool/mail:/sbin/nologin
operator:x:11:0:operator:/root:/sbin/nologin
games:x:12:100:games:/usr/games:/sbin/nologin
ftp:x:14:50:FTP User:/var/ftp:/sbin/nologin
nobody:x:99:99:Nobody:/:/sbin/nologin
systemd-network:x:192:192:systemd Network Management:/:/sbin/nologin
dbus:x:81:81:System message bus:/:/sbin/nologin
ejbca:x:10001:0:ejbca user:/opt:/sbin/nologin
The reason why Pierre did not get this output is because he ran the container overwriting the provided CMD and, as a consequence, not executing the start.sh script responsible of the user creation, as above mentioned.
For any reason, and this is where my knowledge fails me, when Azure is trying to run your container, it is failing because the USER 10001 identified in the Dockerfile does not exist.
I think it could be related with the use of containerd instead of docker.
The error reported by Azure seems related with the Microsoft project opengcs.
They say about the project:
Open Guest Compute Service is a Linux open source project to further the development of a production quality implementation of Linux Hyper-V container on Windows (LCOW). It's designed to run inside a custom Linux OS for supporting Linux container payload.
And:
The focus of LCOW v2 as a replacement of LCOW v1 is through the coordination and work that has gone into containerd/containerd and its Runtime V2 interface. To see our containerd hostside shim please look here Microsoft/hcsshim/cmd/containerd-shim-runhcs-v1.
The error you see in the console is raised by the spec.go file that you can find in their code base, when they are trying to establish the user on behalf of whom the container process should be run:
func setUserID(spec *oci.Spec, uid int) error {
u, err := getUser(spec, func(u user.User) bool {
return u.Uid == uid
})
if err != nil {
return errors.Wrapf(err, "failed to find user by uid: %d", uid)
}
spec.Process.User.UID, spec.Process.User.GID = uint32(u.Uid), uint32(u.Gid)
return nil
}
This code is executed by this other code fragment - you can see the full function code here:
parts := strings.Split(userstr, ":")
switch len(parts) {
case 1:
v, err := strconv.Atoi(parts[0])
if err != nil {
// evaluate username to uid/gid
return setUsername(spec, userstr)
}
return setUserID(spec, int(v))
And the getUser function:
func getUser(spec *oci.Spec, filter func(user.User) bool) (user.User, error) {
users, err := user.ParsePasswdFileFilter(filepath.Join(spec.Root.Path, "/etc/passwd"), filter)
if err != nil {
return user.User{}, err
}
if len(users) != 1 {
return user.User{}, errors.Errorf("expected exactly 1 user matched '%d'", len(users))
}
return users[0], nil
}
As you can see, these are exactly the errors that Azure is reporting you.
As a summary, I think they are providing a Windows LCOW solution that conforms to the OCI Image Format Specification suitable to run containers with containerd.
As you indicated if It used to run with the same configuration a couple weeks ago my best guest is that, perhaps, they switched your containers from a pure Linux containerd runtime implementation to one based in Windows and in the above mentioned software, and this is why you containers are now failing.
A possible workaround could be to create a custom image based on the official provided by PrimeKey and create the user 10001, as also Pierre pointed out.
To accomplish this task, first, create a new custom Dockerfile. You can try, for instance:
FROM primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3
USER 0
RUN echo "ejbca:x:10001:0:ejbca user:/opt:/sbin/nologin" >> /etc/passwd
USER 10001
Please, note that you may need to define some of the environment variables from the official EJBCA image.
With this Dockerfile you can build your image with docker or docker compose with an appropriate docker-compose.yaml file, something like:
version: "3"
services:
ejbca:
image: <your repository>/ejbca
build: .
ports:
- "8080:8080"
- "8443:8443"
Please, customize it as you consider appropriate.
With this setup the new container will still run properly in a local environment in the same way as the original one: I hope it will be also the case in Azure.
User with UID 10001 does not exists in your image. This does not prevent USER command in your Dockerfile to work or the image to be invalid itself, but it seems to cause issues with Azure container.
I cannot find doc or any reference on why it doesn't work on Azure (will update if so), but adding the user in the image should solve the issue. Try adding something like this in your Dockerfile to create user with UID 10001 (this must be done as root, i.e. with user 0) :
useradd -u 10001 myuser
Additional notes to see user 10001 does not exists:
# When running container, not recognized by system
$ docker run docker.io/primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3 whoami
whoami: cannot find name for user ID 10001
# Not present in /etc/passwd
$ docker run docker.io/primekey/ejbca-ce:6.15.2.3 cat /etc/passwd
root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
bin:x:1:1:bin:/bin:/sbin/nologin
daemon:x:2:2:daemon:/sbin:/sbin/nologin
adm:x:3:4:adm:/var/adm:/sbin/nologin
lp:x:4:7:lp:/var/spool/lpd:/sbin/nologin
sync:x:5:0:sync:/sbin:/bin/sync
shutdown:x:6:0:shutdown:/sbin:/sbin/shutdown
halt:x:7:0:halt:/sbin:/sbin/halt
mail:x:8:12:mail:/var/spool/mail:/sbin/nologin
operator:x:11:0:operator:/root:/sbin/nologin
games:x:12:100:games:/usr/games:/sbin/nologin
ftp:x:14:50:FTP User:/var/ftp:/sbin/nologin
nobody:x:99:99:Nobody:/:/sbin/nologin
systemd-network:x:192:192:systemd Network Management:/:/sbin/nologin
dbus:x:81:81:System message bus:/:/sbin/nologin
Can hyperledger-fabric get the peer node running status without entering the docker container? If so, how should I get it?
In docker-compose file, for peer service add following env variable. (You may add a different port for different services)
- CORE_OPERATIONS_LISTENADDRESS=0.0.0.0:9440
expose the port(You may expose port number as per availability). Export different port for different peer
ports:
- 9440:9440
Once all services up hit the following path for specific service(As per port defined)
curl -X GET localhost:9440/healthz
You will get a following response if the service is running.
{
"status": "OK",
"time": "2009-11-10T23:00:00Z"
}
If service is not available, you will get the following response.
{
"status": "Service Unavailable",
"time": "2009-11-10T23:00:00Z",
"failed_checks": [
{
"component": "docker",
"reason": "failed to connect to Docker daemon: invalid endpoint"
}
]
}
The Operations Service might be what you are looking for, the simple check is for "Health" and the more complex check is to look the "metrics".
It is covered in the Fabric docs.
Trying to stop a service (dse datastax enterprise) using ansible 2.7
- name: Stop service dse, if started
service:
name: dse
state: stopped
What I think ansible is saying is, I'm not doing anything because this service is already stopped. Part of the verbose output:
ok: [myhostname.domain.com] => {
"changed": false,
"invocation": {
"module_args": {
"daemon_reload": false,
"enabled": null,
"force": null,
"masked": null,
"name": "dse",
"no_block": false,
"scope": null,
"state": "stopped",
"user": null
}
},
"name": "dse",
"state": "stopped",
When I check the service on the remote host this is what I see
[user#remotehost ~]$ service dse status
dse is running
So what am I missing here?
FYI it's recommended doing a sudo service dse stop for this service, I don't know if lack of the sudo will make such a difference.
My understanding of this is since I do not have an unrestricted sudo and I do not have the ability to execute in /bin/sh thus it is failing.
The same command works when directly run on the server, and that is because
Ansible sends Python code to be executed on the targeted servers. Since Ansible is running Python code and generally not executing system commands directly, you can't limit system commands with sudo and expect them to work with Ansible.
More: https://gist.github.com/nanobeep/3b3d614a709086ff832a
Not sure everyone has this luxury but in my case modifying the sudoers file
from
TheGroupNameImPartOf ALL= ALL, !SU, !SHELLS
to
TheGroupNameImPartOf ALL= ALL
Did the magic!
I'm trying to build a docker image for centos:7 that restricts system commands which any user (including root) can execute inside a docker machine. My intention is that I want to build an docker image with security profile that I need and then use that as my base image to build other application images thereby inheriting security profile from the base image. Is this doable? Am I missing something?
Here is a sample security profile I'm testing:
{
"defaultAction" : "SCMP_ACT_ALLOW",
"syscalls": [
{
"name": "mkdir",
"action": "SCMP_ACT_ERRNO"
},
{
"name": "chown",
"action":"SCMP_ACT_ERRNO"
}
]
}
When i run:
docker build -t test . --security-opt seccomp:policy.json
It throws an error :
Error response from daemon: The daemon on this platform does not support setting security options on build
Thoughts on how to get past this or other approaches I could use?
From Github...
"Docker engine does not support the parameter "--security-opt seccomp=" when executing command "docker build"
#cason you can supply a custom default profile to the daemon.
`--secomp-profile /path/to/profile.json'
https://github.com/moby/moby/issues/34454#issuecomment-321135510