1st container sets the PATH for the user docker
FROM ubuntu:15.10
USER root
RUN groupadd -r docker && useradd -r -g docker docker
USER docker
ENV PATH /hello-world:$PATH
2nd container
FROM step_1
USER root
RUN echo $PATH
When I go into the second container and switch to user docker PATH variable is reset. If in the second container, I do not switch to the root user, variable stay saved.
Why is this happening? How do I for all users docker save variable PATH?
Commands log:
docker build -t step_1 step_1/
docker build -t step_2 step_2/
docker run -it step_2 bash
root#0784c73a84e2:/# echo $PATH
/hello-world:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin
su docker
echo $PATH
/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/usr/games:/usr/local/games
You set the $PATH variable for multiple accounts. Why do you want to use multiple system users in a Docker container? I'm not sure what you try to achieve but I think this would be against the concept of single purpose containers.
If you only intent to execute some of the commands as a privileged user during the build process you don't have to switch users nor use sudo. Every command from a Dockerfile is executed as root unless specified otherwise.
FROM ubuntu:15.10
USER root
Doesn't doesn't do anything, you're already root inside the container.
Per the docs, ENV variables set do persist between images:
The environment variables set using ENV will persist when a container is run from the resulting image. You can view the values using docker inspect...
Ignoring all the above, I can't replicate this issue, it works fine for me. Can you paste your full Dockerfiles and the commands you're running to build etc...?
Related
I am working on hardening our docker images, which I already have a bit of a weak understanding of. With that being said, the current step I am on is preventing the user from running the container as root. To me, that says "when a user runs 'docker exec -it my-container bash', he shall be an unprivileged user" (correct me if I'm wrong).
When I start up my container via docker-compose, the start script that is run needs to be as root since it deals with importing certs and mounted files (created externally and seen through a volume mount). After that is done, I would like the user to be 'appuser' for any future access. This question seems to match pretty well what I'm looking for, but I am using docker-compose, not docker run: How to disable the root access of a docker container?
This seems to be relevant, as the startup command differs from let's say tomcat. We are running a Spring Boot application that we start up with a simple 'java -jar jarFile', and the image is built using maven's dockerfile-maven-plugin. With that being said, should I be changing the user to an unprivileged user before running that, or still after?
I believe changing the user inside of the Dockerfile instead of the start script will do this... but then it will not run the start script as root, thus blowing up on calls that require root. I had messed with using ENTRYPOINT as well, but could have been doing it wrong there. Similarly, using "user:" in the yml file seemed to make the start.sh script run as that user instead of root, so that wasn't working.
Dockerfile:
FROM parent/image:latest
ENV APP_HOME /apphome
ENV APP_USER appuser
ENV APP_GROUP appgroup
# Folder containing our application, i.e. jar file, resources, and scripts.
# This comes from unpacking our maven dependency
ADD target/classes/app ${APP_HOME}/
# Primarily just our start script, but some others
ADD target/classes/scripts /scripts/
# Need to create a folder that will be used at runtime
RUN mkdir -p ${APP_HOME}/data && \
chmod +x /scripts/*.sh && \
chmod +x ${APP_HOME}/*.*
# Create unprivileged user
RUN groupadd -r ${APP_GROUP} && \
useradd -g ${APP_GROUP} -d ${APP_HOME} -s /sbin/nologin -c "Unprivileged User" ${APP_USER} && \
chown -R ${APP_USER}:${APP_GROUP} ${APP_HOME}
WORKDIR $APP_HOME
EXPOSE 8443
CMD /opt/scripts/start.sh
start.sh script:
#!/bin/bash
# setup SSL, modify java command, etc
# run our java application
java -jar "boot.jar"
# Switch users to always be unprivileged from here on out?
# Whatever "hardening" wants... Should this be before starting our application?
exec su -s "/bin/bash" $APP_USER
app.yml file:
version: '3.3'
services:
app:
image: app_image:latest
labels:
c2core.docker.compose.display-name: My Application
c2core.docker.compose.profiles: a_profile
volumes:
- "data_mount:/apphome/data"
- "cert_mount:/certs"
hostname: some-hostname
domainname: some-domain
ports:
- "8243:8443"
environment:
- some_env_vars
depends_on:
- another-app
networks:
a_network:
aliases:
- some-network
networks:
a_network:
driver: bridge
volumes:
data_mount:
cert_mount:
docker-compose shell script:
docker-compose -f app.yml -f another-app.yml $#
What I would expect is that anyone trying to access the container internally will be doing so as appuser and not root. The goal is to prevent someone from messing with things they shouldn't (i.e. docker itself).
What is happening is that the script will change users after the app has started (proven via an echo command), but it doesn't seem to be maintained. If I exec into it, I'm still root.
As David mentions, once someone has access to the docker socket (either via API or with the docker CLI), that typically means they have root access to your host. It's trivial to use that access to run a privileged container with host namespaces and volume mounts that let the attacker do just about anything.
When you need to initialize a container with steps that run as root, I do recommend gosu over something like su since su was not designed for containers and will leave a process running as the root pid. Make sure that you exec the call to gosu and that will eliminate anything running as root. However, the user you start the container as is the same as the user used for docker exec, and since you need to start as root, your exec will run as root unless you override it with a -u flag.
There are additional steps you can take to lock down docker in general:
Use user namespaces. These are defined on the entire daemon, require that you destroy all containers, and pull images again, since the uid mapping affects the storage of image layers. The user namespace offsets the uid's used by docker so that root inside the container is not root on the host, while inside the container you can still bind to low numbered ports and run administrative activities.
Consider authz plugins. Open policy agent and Twistlock are two that I know of, though I don't know if either would allow you to restrict the user of a docker exec command. They likely require that you give users a certificate to connect to docker rather than giving them direct access to the docker socket since the socket doesn't have any user details included in API requests it receives.
Consider rootless docker. This is still experimental, but since docker is not running as root, it has no access back to the host to perform root activities, mitigating many of the issues seen when containers are run as root.
You intrinsically can't prevent root-level access to your container.
Anyone who can run any Docker command at all can always run any of these three commands:
# Get a shell, as root, in a running container
docker exec -it -u 0 container_name /bin/sh
# Launch a new container, running a root shell, on some image
docker run --rm -it -u 0 --entrypoint /bin/sh image_name
# Get an interactive shell with unrestricted root access to the host
# filesystem (cd /host/var/lib/docker)
docker run --rm -it -v /:/host busybox /bin/sh
It is generally considered best practice to run your container as a non-root user, either with a USER directive in the Dockerfile or running something like gosu in an entrypoint script, like what you show. You can't prevent root access, though, in the face of a privileged user who's sufficiently interested in getting it.
When the docker is normally run from one host, you can do some steps.
Make sure it is not run from another host by looking for a secret in a directory mounted from the accepted host.
Change the .bashrc of the users on the host, so that they will start running the docker as soon as they login. When your users needs to do other things on the host, give them an account without docker access and let them sudo to a special user with docker access (or use a startdocker script with a setuid flag).
Start the docker with a script that you made and hardened, something like startserver.
#!/bin/bash
settings() {
# Add mount dirs. The homedir in the docker will be different from the one on the host.
mountdirs="-v /mirrored_home:/home -v /etc/dockercheck:/etc/dockercheck:ro"
usroptions="--user $(id -u):$(id -g) -v /etc/passwd:/etc/passwd:ro"
usroptions="${usroptions} -v/etc/shadow:/etc/shadow:ro -v /etc/group:/etc/group:ro"
}
# call function that fills special variables
settings
image="my_image:latest"
docker run -ti --rm ${usroptions} ${mountdirs} -w $HOME --entrypoint=/bin/bash "${image}"
Adding a variable --env HOSTSERVER=${host} won't help hardening, on another server one can add --env HOSTSERVER=servername_that_will_be_checked.
When the user logins to the host, the startserver will be called and the docker started. After the call to the startserver add exit to the .bash_rc.
Not sure if this work but you can try. Allow sudo access for user/group with limited execution command. Sudo configuration only allow to execute docker-cli. Create a shell script by the name docker-cli with content that runs docker command, eg docker "$#". In this file, check the argument and enforce user to provide switch --user or -u when executing exec or attach command of docker. Also make sure validate the user don't provide a switch saying -u root. Eg
sudo docker-cli exec -it containerid sh (failed)
sudo docker-cli exec -u root ... (failed)
sudo docker-cli exec -u mysql ... (Passed)
You can even limit the docker command a user can run inside this shell script
In the below docker file, base image(jenkins/jenkins) is providing a user jenkins with UID 1000 and GID 1000, within container.
FROM jenkins/jenkins
# Install some base packages
# Use non-privileged user provided by base image
USER jenkins # with uid 1000 and GID 1000
# Copy plugins and other stuff
On the docker host(EC2 instance), we also have similar UID & GID created,
$ groupadd -g 1000 jenkins
$ useradd -u 1000 -g jenkins jenkins
$ mkdir -p /abc/home_folder_for_jenkins
$ chown -R jenkins:jenkins /abc/home_folder_for_jenkins
to make sure, container can write files to /abc/home_folder_for_jenkins in EC2 instance.
Another aspect that we need to take care in same EC2 instance, is to run containers(other than above container) to run in non-privileged mode.
So, below configuration is performed on docker host(EC2):
$ echo dockremap:165536:65536 > /etc/subuid
$ echo dockremap:165536:65536 > /etc/subgid
$ echo '{"debug":true, "userns-remap":"default"}' > /etc/docker/daemon.json
This dockremap configuration is not allowing jenkins to start and docker container goes in Exited state:
$ ls -l /abc/home_folder_for_jenkins
total 0
After removing docker remap configuration, everything work fine.
Why dockremap configuration not allow the jenkins container to run as jenkins user?
I'm actually fighting with this because it seems not very portable but this is the best I found. As said above on your docker host the UID/GID are the ones from the container + the value in /etc/subuid & /etc/subgid.
So your "container root" is 165536 on your host and your user jenkins is 166536 (165536 + 1000).
To come back to your example what you need to do is
$ mkdir -p /abc/home_folder_for_jenkins
$ chown -R 166536:166536 /abc/home_folder_for_jenkins
User namespaces offset the UID/GID of the user inside the container, and any files inside the container. There is no mapping from the UID/GID inside the container to the external host UID/GID (that would defeat the purpose). Therefore, you would need the offset the UID/GID of the directory being created, or just use a named volume and let docker handle this for you. I believe that UID/GID on the host would be 166536 (165536 + 1000) (I may have an off by one in there, so try opening the directory permissions if this still fails and see what gets created).
When I run a docker image for example like
docker run -v /home/n1/workspace:/root/workspace -it rust:latest bash
and I create a directory in the container like
mkdir /root/workspace/test
It's owned by root on my host machine. Which leads to I have to change the permissions everytime after I turn of the container to be able to operate with that directory.
Is there a way how to tell Docker to handle directories and files from my machine (host machine) point of view under a certain user?
You need to run your application as the same uid inside the container as you do on the host to get file ownership to match. My own solution for this is to start the container as root, adjust the uid of the user inside the container to match the volume mount, and then su to the user to run the app. Scripts for this can be found in this repo: https://github.com/sudo-bmitch/docker-base
The in that repo, the fix-perms script handles the change in uid/gid inside the container, and the entrypoint script has an exec gosu $username "$#" that runs the app as the selected user.
Sure, because Docker uses root as a default user. You should create user in your docker container, switch to that user and then make folder, then you will get them without root permissions on you host machine.
Dockerfile
FROM rust:latest
...
RUN useradd -ms /bin/bash myuser
USER myuser
I have a folder in host machine's this directory /files/username/. username is variable.
And this is my Dockerfile's CMD directive:
CMD ./entrypoint.sh
I want to get contents of /files/username/ folder in entrypoint.sh. And I can get username variable as an environmental variable like this:
$ docker run -e username="User 1" ...
In this way is it possible to reach host device's folders inside entrypoint.sh?
There are two ways to do it.
Share the main folder
docker run -v /files:/files -e username="User 1"
This way your entrypoint script will be able to work on any user
Share only user folder
docker run -v /files/user:/files/user -e username="User 1"
This would only give access for that particular user
I would like to start a stopped Docker container with a different command, as the default command crashes - meaning I can't start the container and then use 'docker exec'.
Basically I would like to start a shell so I can inspect the contents of the container.
Luckily I created the container with the -it option!
Find your stopped container id
docker ps -a
Commit the stopped container:
This command saves modified container state into a new image named user/test_image:
docker commit $CONTAINER_ID user/test_image
Start/run with a different entry point:
docker run -ti --entrypoint=sh user/test_image
Entrypoint argument description:
https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/run/#/entrypoint-default-command-to-execute-at-runtime
Note:
Steps above just start a stopped container with the same filesystem state. That is great for a quick investigation; but environment variables, network configuration, attached volumes and other stuff is not inherited. You should specify all these arguments explicitly.
Steps to start a stopped container have been borrowed from here: (last comment) https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/18078
Edit this file (corresponding to your stopped container):
vi /var/lib/docker/containers/923...4f6/config.json
Change the "Path" parameter to point at your new command, e.g. /bin/bash. You may also set the "Args" parameter to pass arguments to the command.
Restart the docker service (note this will stop all running containers unless you first enable live-restore):
service docker restart
List your containers and make sure the command has changed:
docker ps -a
Start the container and attach to it, you should now be in your shell!
docker start -ai mad_brattain
Worked on Fedora 22 using Docker 1.7.1.
NOTE: If your shell is not interactive (e.g. you did not create the original container with -it option), you can instead change the command to "/bin/sleep 600" or "/bin/tail -f /dev/null" to give you enough time to do "docker exec -it CONTID /bin/bash" as another way of getting a shell.
NOTE2: Newer versions of docker have config.v2.json, where you will need to change either Entrypoint or Cmd (thanks user60561).
Add a check to the top of your Entrypoint script
Docker really needs to implement this as a new feature, but here's another workaround option for situations in which you have an Entrypoint that terminates after success or failure, which can make it difficult to debug.
If you don't already have an Entrypoint script, create one that runs whatever command(s) you need for your container. Then, at the top of this file, add these lines to entrypoint.sh:
# Run once, hold otherwise
if [ -f "already_ran" ]; then
echo "Already ran the Entrypoint once. Holding indefinitely for debugging."
cat
fi
touch already_ran
# Do your main things down here
To ensure that cat holds the connection, you may need to provide a TTY. I'm running the container with my Entrypoint script like so:
docker run -t --entrypoint entrypoint.sh image_name
This will cause the script to run once, creating a file that indicates it has already run (in the container's virtual filesystem). You can then restart the container to perform debugging:
docker start container_name
When you restart the container, the already_ran file will be found, causing the Entrypoint script to stall with cat (which just waits forever for input that will never come, but keeps the container alive). You can then execute a debugging bash session:
docker exec -i container_name bash
While the container is running, you can also remove already_ran and manually execute the entrypoint.sh script to rerun it, if you need to debug that way.
I took #Dmitriusan's answer and made it into an alias:
alias docker-run-prev-container='prev_container_id="$(docker ps -aq | head -n1)" && docker commit "$prev_container_id" "prev_container/$prev_container_id" && docker run -it --entrypoint=bash "prev_container/$prev_container_id"'
Add this into your ~/.bashrc aliases file, and you'll have a nifty new docker-run-prev-container alias which'll drop you into a shell in the previous container.
Helpful for debugging failed docker builds.
This is not exactly what you're asking for, but you can use docker export on a stopped container if all you want is to inspect the files.
mkdir $TARGET_DIR
docker export $CONTAINER_ID | tar -x -C $TARGET_DIR
docker-compose run --entrypoint /bin/bash cont_id_or_name
(for conven, put your env, vol mounts in the docker-compose.yml)
or use docker run and manually spec all args
It seems docker can't change entry point after a container started. But you can set a custom entry point and change the code of the entry point next time you restart it.
For example you run a container like this:
docker run --name c --entrypoint "/boot" -v "./boot":/boot $image
Here is the boot entry point:
#!/bin/bash
command_a
When you need restart c with a different command, you just change the boot script:
#!/bin/bash
command_b
And restart:
docker restart c
My Problem:
I started a container with docker run <IMAGE_NAME>
And then added some files to this container
Then I closed the container and tried to start it again withe same command as above.
But when I checked the new files, they were missing
when I run docker ps -a I could see two containers.
That means every time I was running docker run <IMAGE_NAME> command, new image was getting created
Solution:
To work on the same container you created in the first place run follow these steps
docker ps to get container of your container
docker container start <CONTAINER_ID> to start existing container
Then you can continue from where you left. e.g. docker exec -it <CONTAINER_ID> /bin/bash
You can then decide to create a new image out of it
I have found a simple command
docker start -a [container_name]
This will do the trick
Or
docker start [container_name]
then
docker exec -it [container_name] bash
I had a docker container where the MariaDB container was continuously crashing on startup because of corrupted InnoDB tables.
What I did to solve my problem was:
copy out the docker-entrypoint.sh from the container to the local file system (docker cp)
edit it to include the needed command line parameter (--innodb-force-recovery=1 in my case)
copy the edited file back into the docker container, overwriting the existing entrypoint script.
To me Docker always leaves the impression that it was created for a hobby system, it works well for that.
If something fails or doesn't work, don't expect to have a professional solution.
That said: Docker does not only NOT support such basic administrative tasks, it tries to prevent them.
Solution:
cd /var/lib/docker/overlay2/
find | grep somechangedfile
# You now can see the changed file from your container in a hexcoded folder/diff
cd hexcoded-folder/diff
Create an entrypoint.sh (make sure to backup an existing one if it's there)
cat > entrypoint.sh
#!/bin/bash
while ((1)); do sleep 1; done;
Ctrl+C
chmod +x entrypoint.sh
docker stop
docker start
You now have your docker container running an endless loop instead of the originally entry, you can exec bash into it, or do whatever you need.
When finished stop the container, remove/rename your custom entrypoint.
It seems like most of the time people are running into this while modifying a config file, which is what I did. I was trying to bypass CORS for a PHP/Apache server with a Vue SPA as my entry point. Anyway, if you know the file you horked, a simple solution that worked for me was
Copy the file you horked out of the image:
docker cp bt-php:/etc/apache2/apache2.conf .
Fix it locally
Copy it back in
docker cp apache2.conf bt-php:/etc/apache2/apache2.conf
Start your container back up
*Bonus points - Since this file is being modified, add it to your Compose or Build scripts so that when you do get it right it will be baked into the image!
Lots of discussion surrounding this so I thought I would add one more which I did not immediately see listed above:
If the full path to the entrypoint for the container is known (or discoverable via inspection) it can be copied in and out of the stopped container using 'docker cp'. This means you can copy the original out of the container, edit a copy of it to start a bash shell (or a long sleep timer) instead of whatever it was doing, and then restart the container. The running container can now be further edited with the bash shell to correct any problems. When finished editing another docker cp of the original entrypoint back into the container and a re-restart should do the trick.
I have used this once to correct a 'quick fix' that I butterfingered and was no longer able to run the container with the normal entrypoint until it was corrected.
I also agree there should be a better way to do this via docker: Maybe an option to 'docker restart' that allows an alternate entrypoint? Hey, maybe that already works with '--entrypoint'? Not sure, didn't try it, left as exercise for reader, let me know if it works. :)