mirror of
https://github.com/netblue30/firejail.git
synced 2026-05-15 14:16:14 -06:00
[GH-ISSUE #4937] Profile for signal-desktop fails! #2828
Labels
No labels
LTS merge
LTS merge
bug
bug
converted-to-discussion
doc-todo
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
file-transfer
firecfg
firejail-in-firejail
firetools
graphics
help wanted
information_old
installation
invalid
modif
moved
needinfo
networking
notabug
notourbug
old-version
overlayfs
packaging
profile-request
pull-request
question
question_old
removal
runtime-permissions
sandbox-ipc
security
stale
wiki
wiki
wontfix
wordpress
workaround
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: github-starred/firejail#2828
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @ghost on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/4937
Description
I tried to launch signal-desktop after running firecfg and the program fails to start.
Steps to Reproduce
Expected behavior
Signal should start.
Actual behavior
Behavior without a profile
LC_ALL=C firejail --noprofile /path/to/programCalling signal by running
/bin/signal-desktopcauses Signal to launch as expected.Environment
Checklist
/usr/bin/vlc) "fixes" it).https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/1139)browser-allow-drm yes/browser-disable-u2f noinfirejail.configto allow DRM/U2F in browsers.--profile=PROFILENAMEto set the right profile. (Only relevant for AppImages)Log
Output of
LC_ALL=C firejail /path/to/programEDIT by @rusty-snake: fix markdown checklist; fix details tag
@rusty-snake commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
Did you set
force-nonewprivs yesin firejail.config?@ghost commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
Indeed I did. I followed the instructions to harden firejail. I suppose this is an issue. How should I handle the situation?
@rusty-snake commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
You can not set nnp and disable userns if you want to use chromium* programs.
Either set
force-nonewprivs noorsysctl kernel.unprivileged_userns_clone=1(IMHO the right thing).@ghost commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
From what I read
sysctl kernel.unprivileged_userns_clone=1is a security risk, whileforce-nonewprivs nodisabled the general hardening for firejail. Can you tell me if there is a third option, that would be to set firecfg to exclude signal-desktop from profile generation or a setting I could put into the signal-desktop.local that disables restriction. I think under the circumstances I would exclude signal from being handeled by firejail@rusty-snake commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
The idea behind
force-nonewprivsis that you can not undo it, otherwise it wouldn't be a hardening option.It's such a huge security risk that it is the default in mainline, Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, ... kernels.
Did you know that firefox is a security risk?
Yes you can #2097, https://github.com/netblue30/firejail/issues/3665#issuecomment-707689049, #3016, ...
@ghost commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
Thank you for the links. I left the hardening in place.
I created a script to remove the links from applications I want to exclude.
Then I modified the pacman hook accordingly to run the script everytime it runs firecfg.
@rusty-snake commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
All this issue is about a problem caused by multiple hardening option to mitigate potential user2root exploits (which aren't much of an issue for the most desktop systems) that could be discovered in the future.. And to fix it you automatically execute a user writeable script as root? Think of your thread models.
@ghost commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
Thank you for your concern, but the script is not user writable.
As long as some applications make problems with firejail, I will exclude them and let Apparmor handle them. It is a single application so far, so I think this is a good compromise.
@rusty-snake commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
Is
/home/user/scriptsowned by you and writeable?@ghost commented on GitHub (Feb 13, 2022):
Oh, I actually did not know that this works. Thanks for explaining. I moved the script to /root/scripts for now. I still think only excluding the few applications that make problems is the best way to go.