mirror of
https://github.com/moby/moby.git
synced 2022-11-09 12:21:53 -05:00
Fixed #6545 - Updated Security article
Docker-DCO-1.1-Signed-off-by: James Turnbull <james@lovedthanlost.net> (github: jamtur01)
This commit is contained in:
parent
874698cb4a
commit
bf69b773ec
1 changed files with 29 additions and 32 deletions
|
@ -17,15 +17,10 @@ There are three major areas to consider when reviewing Docker security:
|
|||
|
||||
## Kernel Namespaces
|
||||
|
||||
Docker containers are essentially LXC containers, and they come with the
|
||||
same security features. When you start a container with
|
||||
`docker run`, behind the scenes Docker uses
|
||||
`lxc-start` to execute the Docker container. This
|
||||
creates a set of namespaces and control groups for the container. Those
|
||||
namespaces and control groups are not created by Docker itself, but by
|
||||
`lxc-start`. This means that as the LXC userland
|
||||
tools evolve (and provide additional namespaces and isolation features),
|
||||
Docker will automatically make use of them.
|
||||
Docker containers are very similar to LXC containers, and they come with
|
||||
the similar security features. When you start a container with `docker
|
||||
run`, behind the scenes Docker creates a set of namespaces and control
|
||||
groups for the container.
|
||||
|
||||
**Namespaces provide the first and most straightforward form of
|
||||
isolation**: processes running within a container cannot see, and even
|
||||
|
@ -55,10 +50,9 @@ ago), namespace code has been exercised and scrutinized on a large
|
|||
number of production systems. And there is more: the design and
|
||||
inspiration for the namespaces code are even older. Namespaces are
|
||||
actually an effort to reimplement the features of [OpenVZ](
|
||||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVZ) in such a way that they
|
||||
could be merged within the mainstream kernel. And OpenVZ was initially
|
||||
released in 2005, so both the design and the implementation are pretty
|
||||
mature.
|
||||
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenVZ) in such a way that they could be
|
||||
merged within the mainstream kernel. And OpenVZ was initially released
|
||||
in 2005, so both the design and the implementation are pretty mature.
|
||||
|
||||
## Control Groups
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -82,7 +76,7 @@ started in 2006, and initially merged in kernel 2.6.24.
|
|||
## Docker Daemon Attack Surface
|
||||
|
||||
Running containers (and applications) with Docker implies running the
|
||||
Docker daemon. This daemon currently requires root privileges, and you
|
||||
Docker daemon. This daemon currently requires `root` privileges, and you
|
||||
should therefore be aware of some important details.
|
||||
|
||||
First of all, **only trusted users should be allowed to control your
|
||||
|
@ -114,8 +108,9 @@ socket.
|
|||
You can also expose the REST API over HTTP if you explicitly decide so.
|
||||
However, if you do that, being aware of the above mentioned security
|
||||
implication, you should ensure that it will be reachable only from a
|
||||
trusted network or VPN; or protected with e.g. `stunnel`
|
||||
and client SSL certificates.
|
||||
trusted network or VPN; or protected with e.g. `stunnel` and client SSL
|
||||
certificates. You can also secure them with [HTTPS and
|
||||
certificates](/articles/https/).
|
||||
|
||||
Recent improvements in Linux namespaces will soon allow to run
|
||||
full-featured containers without root privileges, thanks to the new user
|
||||
|
@ -199,15 +194,18 @@ container, it will be much harder to do serious damage, or to escalate
|
|||
to the host.
|
||||
|
||||
This won't affect regular web apps; but malicious users will find that
|
||||
the arsenal at their disposal has shrunk considerably! You can see [the
|
||||
list of dropped capabilities in the Docker
|
||||
code](https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/blob/v0.5.0/lxc_template.go#L97),
|
||||
and a full list of available capabilities in [Linux
|
||||
the arsenal at their disposal has shrunk considerably! By default Docker
|
||||
drops all capabilities except [those
|
||||
needed](https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/blob/master/daemon/execdriver/native/template/default_template.go),
|
||||
a whitelist instead of a blacklist approach. You can see a full list of
|
||||
available capabilities in [Linux
|
||||
manpages](http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/capabilities.7.html).
|
||||
|
||||
Of course, you can always enable extra capabilities if you really need
|
||||
them (for instance, if you want to use a FUSE-based filesystem), but by
|
||||
default, Docker containers will be locked down to ensure maximum safety.
|
||||
default, Docker containers use only a
|
||||
[whitelist](https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/blob/master/daemon/execdriver/native/template/default_template.go)
|
||||
of kernel capabilities by default.
|
||||
|
||||
## Other Kernel Security Features
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -222,17 +220,16 @@ harden a Docker host. Here are a few examples.
|
|||
|
||||
- You can run a kernel with GRSEC and PAX. This will add many safety
|
||||
checks, both at compile-time and run-time; it will also defeat many
|
||||
exploits, thanks to techniques like address randomization. It
|
||||
doesn't require Docker-specific configuration, since those security
|
||||
features apply system-wide, independently of containers.
|
||||
- If your distribution comes with security model templates for LXC
|
||||
containers, you can use them out of the box. For instance, Ubuntu
|
||||
comes with AppArmor templates for LXC, and those templates provide
|
||||
an extra safety net (even though it overlaps greatly with
|
||||
capabilities).
|
||||
exploits, thanks to techniques like address randomization. It doesn't
|
||||
require Docker-specific configuration, since those security features
|
||||
apply system-wide, independently of containers.
|
||||
- If your distribution comes with security model templates for
|
||||
Docker containers, you can use them out of the box. For instance, we
|
||||
ship a template that works with AppArmor and Red Hat comes with SELinux
|
||||
policies for Docker. These templates provide an extra safety net (even
|
||||
though it overlaps greatly with capabilities).
|
||||
- You can define your own policies using your favorite access control
|
||||
mechanism. Since Docker containers are standard LXC containers,
|
||||
there is nothing “magic” or specific to Docker.
|
||||
mechanism.
|
||||
|
||||
Just like there are many third-party tools to augment Docker containers
|
||||
with e.g. special network topologies or shared filesystems, you can
|
||||
|
@ -243,7 +240,7 @@ affecting Docker's core.
|
|||
|
||||
Docker containers are, by default, quite secure; especially if you take
|
||||
care of running your processes inside the containers as non-privileged
|
||||
users (i.e. non root).
|
||||
users (i.e. non-`root`).
|
||||
|
||||
You can add an extra layer of safety by enabling Apparmor, SELinux,
|
||||
GRSEC, or your favorite hardening solution.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue