July 2023 - openstack-discuss - lists.openstack.org

CVE-2023-2088 for Ubuntu Openstack
by Corey Bryant 17 Jul '23

17 Jul '23

Bug LP:#2004555 (CVE-2023-2088) identified that “an unauthorised access to a volume could occur when an iSCSI or FC connection from a host is severed due to a volume being unmapped on the storage system and the device is later reused for another volume on the same host”. While the bug affects iSCSI and FC, the fix introduces a breaking change for configurations upgrading to the fixed packages if they do not have service token support enabled. The new code introduces mandatory use of service tokens to identify requests coming from a trusted control plane service. Service tokens are issued by Keystone for service users. For example, a token can be issued to the Nova service user. They have a particular trust level, defined by the service, that allows them to perform trusted actions. In the case of Nova, the action is detaching volumes from instances. Versions of Ubuntu OpenStack for Yoga and later will have new packages versions released with CVE patches applied that require the use of service tokens to enable the detaching and deletion of volumes on instances. These packages will be released on July 24, 2023. Versions of Ubuntu OpenStack for Xena and earlier will not have package updates released and will still be vulnerable to the “unauthorised detach of volumes” issue until a mitigation policy is applied. The mitigation policy provided requires the use of service tokens. = Patched packages = The following package versions include patches for CVE-2023-2088. These package versions deliver services that require the use of service tokens. Package versions prior to those listed will not be patched for CVE-2023-2088 and will therefore require policy updates for mitigation. Ubuntu 23.04 (Lunar) * nova >= 3:27.0.0-0ubuntu1.3 * cinder >= 2:22.0.0-0ubuntu1.3 * python-os-brick >= 6.2.0-0ubuntu2.3 * ironic >= 1:21.4.0-0ubuntu1.1 * python-glance-store >= 4.3.0-0ubuntu1.3 Ubuntu Cloud Archive Antelope * nova >= 3:27.0.0-0ubuntu1.3~cloud0 * cinder >= 2:22.0.0-0ubuntu1.3~cloud0 * python-os-brick >= 6.2.0-0ubuntu2.3~cloud0 * ironic >= 1:21.4.0-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * python-glance-store >= 4.3.0-0ubuntu1.3~cloud0 Ubuntu 22.10 (Kinetic) * nova >= 3:26.1.1-0ubuntu1.1 * cinder >= 2:21.2.0-0ubuntu1.1 * python-os-brick >= os-brick - 6.1.0-0ubuntu1.3 * ironic >= 1:21.1.0-0ubuntu1.1 * python-glance-store >= 4.1.0-0ubuntu1.3 Ubuntu Cloud Archive Zed * nova >= 3:26.1.1-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * cinder >= 2:21.2.0-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * python-os-brick >= os-brick - 6.1.0-0ubuntu1.3~cloud0 * ironic >= 1:21.1.0-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * python-glance-store >= 4.1.0-0ubuntu1.3~cloud0 Ubuntu 22.04 (Jammy) * nova >= 3:25.1.1-0ubuntu1.1 * cinder >= 2:20.2.0-0ubuntu1.1 * python-os-brick >= 5.2.2-0ubuntu1.2 * ironic >= 1:20.1.0-0ubuntu1.1 * python-glance-store >= 3.0.0-0ubuntu1.3 Ubuntu Cloud Archive Yoga * nova >= 3:25.1.1-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * cinder >= 2:20.2.0-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * python-os-brick >= 5.2.2-0ubuntu1.2~cloud0 * ironic >= 1:20.1.0-0ubuntu1.1~cloud0 * python-glance-store >= 3.0.0-0ubuntu1.3~cloud0 = Using a custom Cinder policy as a mitigation = It’s possible to restrict the access to the operations affected by this CVE by providing a custom Cinder policy file that will prevent users from deleting attachments, detach and force detach. In order to use this mitigation, service token support must be enabled. The exact method for customising this depends on the deployment tooling being used. The following steps can be used as a guildeline: 1) Identify the nova service user id running the following command openstack user show --domain service_domain -f value -c id nova The command output looks like this ae034831d6bf41099327bf9d34988fbc 2) Create and apply the following policy to cinder, using the output of the previous command: "is_service": "role:service or service_user_id:ae034831d6bf41099327bf9d34988fbc" "legacy_system_admin_or_project_member": "(role:admin) or (role:member and project_id:%(project_id)s)" "volume:attachment_delete": "rule:legacy_system_admin_or_project_member and rule:is_service" "volume_extension:volume_actions:terminate_connection": "rule:legacy_system_admin_or_project_member and rule:is_service" "volume_extension:volume_actions:detach": "rule:legacy_system_admin_or_project_member and rule:is_service" "volume_extension:volume_admin_actions:force_detach": "!" = Frequently Asked Questions = Q: What can I do if my deployed cloud doesn’t have service tokens enabled and my deployment tooling doesn’t have the option to enable them? A: Pin the version of the affected packages to block the upgrades to the versions listed in “Affected packages” section or newer, until service tokens are enabled. = References = * CVE-2023-2088: https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2023-2088 * OSSA-2023-003 Unauthorized volume access through deleted volume attachments: https://security.openstack.org/ossa/OSSA-2023-003.html * OSSN-0092 Using Configuration as a Short-Term Mitigation for OSSA-2023-003: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OSSN/OSSN-0092 * Bug 2004555: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/2004555

1 0

[designate] About delegating PTR using shared zones on a shared internal network
by Thomas Goirand 17 Jul '23

17 Jul '23

Hi there! I have just watched Michael Johnson's video of the presentation at the last Vancouver summit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdhvNezU1w4 This was very interesting, and thanks Michael, for that awesome feature. In our use case, we created an OpenStack internal network, that is shared for all of our customers, so that they can allocate public IPs assigned directly to their instances, without the need to create a router and use NAT. For the moment (since we don't have the shared zones feature yet), we manage the PTR record through support tickets. We'd like to move forward, and delegate the PTR handling to our customer, whenever they allocate a port on that specific shared network. How can this be done? Should we create a new sink of our own, so that we would automate the the shared zone creation, so that it would delegate the in-addr.arpa. range, when a port on that network is created, and the same way, remove the delegation (and records) whenever the port is deleted? Would this be something similar, probably, we the sink we implemented to automatically delete PTR records in floating IPs, available here [1]? [1] https://salsa.debian.org/openstack-team/services/designate/-/blob/debian/an… I'd love to have some pointers / examples, so we could implement this directly in Designate, so that the feature could be shared in the OpenStack community. For sure, we aren't the only public cloud provider with the use case... Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

2 3

UX
by A.R. Rumman 17 Jul '23

17 Jul '23

Hi, I am a UX Designer. I would love to contribute to OpenStack. So what's the next step or process? Thank you.

2 1

OpenStack "C" Release Voting Reminder
by Kristin Barrientos 17 Jul '23

17 Jul '23

Hi everyone, Just a reminder to get your votes in for the OpenStack “C” Release. Voting closes Tuesday, July 18! Vote here: https://civs1.civs.us/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_852cf3e53467d72e&akey=1504cb6ad9… Thanks, Kristin Barrientos Marketing Coordinator OpenInfra Foundation

1 0

[publiccloud-sig] Reminder - next meeting July 19th - 0700 UTC
by Felix Kronlage-Dammers 17 Jul '23

17 Jul '23

Hi everyone, this Wednesday the next meeting of the public cloud sig is going to happen. We meet on IRC in #openstack-operators at 0700 UTC. This time, we will switch to a jitsi-based video-call directly after start. The url will be posted on #openstack-operators at the time of the meeting. A preliminary agenda can be found in the pad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/publiccloud-sig-meeting See also here for all other details: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PublicCloudSIG read^see you on Wednesday! felix -- Felix Kronlage-Dammers Product Owner IaaS & Operations Sovereign Cloud Stack Sovereign Cloud Stack — standardized, built and operated by many Ein Projekt der Open Source Business Alliance - Bundesverband für digitale Souveränität e.V. Tel.: +49-30-206539-205 | Matrix: @fkronlage:matrix.org | fkr(a)osb-alliance.com

1 0

[neutron] Bugs deputy report July 10th - 16th
by Miguel Lavalle 17 Jul '23

17 Jul '23

Hi, Here's last week's bugs deputy report: Critical ====== https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027817 neutron slow jobs before xena broken with ERROR: unknown environment 'slow'. Assigned to Ghanshyam Mann. Proposed fix: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/888590. In progress High ==== https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027605 [OVN][Trunk] Sometimes subport doesn't reach status ACTIVE after live-migration. Requires owner Medium ====== https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027595 [sqlalchemy-20] Check represent "network" model regardless of the elements order. Assigned to Rodolfo Alonso. Proposed fix: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/888286. Merged. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027602 [sqlalchemy-20] "FromClause.join" accepts only one model and an optional expression to define the join. Assigned to Rodolfo Alonso. Proposed fix: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/888295. Merged. https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027604 [sqlalchemy-20] The Query.get() method is considered legacy as of the 1.x series of SQLAlchemy and becomes a legacy construct in 2.0. Assigned to Rodolfo Alonso https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027610 [sqlalchemy-20] Error in "test_notify_port_status_all_values" using an wrong OVO parameter Assigned to Rodolfo Alonso. Proposed fix: https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron/+/888305. Merged RFEs ==== https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2027742 [RFE] unmanaged dynamic router resources - OVN Heads up from the Ironic team: ======================== https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/2026757. dnsmasq on Ubuntu Jammy/Lunar crashes on neutron-dhcp-agent updates. Julia Kreger indicates that most likely this is not a neutron bug. However, she believes we might encounter it at some point. Yatin Karel is watching it. Bringing it up just for visibility to the Neutron team

1 0

[kolla-ansible][octavia]
by Nguyễn Hữu Khôi 15 Jul '23

15 Jul '23

Hello guys. I am using openstack yoga by kolla-ansible but when i reconfigure octavia then it stucked at TASK [octavia : Create loadbalancer management network] \"Unable to create the network. The VLAN xxx on physical network physnet1 is in use.\ I see that it cannot create lb network because someone used it. Will we need to change some kolla-ansible tasks to fix it? Thank you very much. Nguyen Huu Khoi

2 3

[neutron] Neutron drivers meeting
by Rodolfo Alonso Hernandez 14 Jul '23

14 Jul '23

Hello Neutrinos: Today's meeting will be cancelled due to the lack of quorum. At least three of our drivers members [1] are in PTO today, thus we'll postpone the requested RFE discussion [2] to next week. Sorry for the inconveniences. Regards. [1]https://launchpad.net/~neutron-drivers/+members [2]https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers

1 0

[cinder] I/O throttling using blkio cgroups
by Jon Bernard 14 Jul '23

14 Jul '23

I started to look at a cinder bug [1] to migrate our cgroup usage from v1 to v2 and I'm wondering: is anyone using this feature to throttle cinder's local I/O per cinder-volume instance? Docker since 20.10 and kubernetes since version 1.19 support cgroup v2. Since cinder services are deployed within containers, I think it makes sense to consider implementing I/O throttling at the container-level as opposed to application-specific code within a particular service (cinder in this case, but I believe glance also leverages cgroups). That would mean instead of updating our implementation to use the v2 interface, we could drop our cgroup code entirely in favor of a more generic solution that could be applied to any container that performs local I/O. Would anyone be opposed to this idea? Thoughts? 1: https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1942203 -- Jon

1 0

SNAT failure with OVN under Antelope
by Gary Molenkamp 14 Jul '23

14 Jul '23

Good morning, I'm having a problem with snat routing under OVN but I'm not sure if something is mis-configured or just my understanding of how OVN is architected is wrong. I've built a Zed cloud, since upgraded to Antelope, using the Neutron Manual install method here: https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/install/ovn/manual_install.html I'm using a multi-tenent configuration using geneve and the flat provider network is present on each hypervisor. Each hypervisor is connected to the physical provider network, along with the tenent network and is tagged as an external chassis under OVN. br-int exists, as does br-provider ovs-vsctl set open . external-ids:ovn-cms-options=enable-chassis-as-gw For most cases, distributed FIP based connectivity is working without issue, but I'm having an issue where VMs without a FIP are not always able to use the SNAT services of the tenent network router. Scenario: Internal network named cs3319: with subnet 172.31.100.0/23 Has a router named cs3319_router with external gateway set (snat enabled) This network has 3 vms: - #1 has a FIP and can be accessed externally - #2 has no FIP, can be accessed via VM1 and can access external resources via SNAT (ie OS repos, DNS, etc) - #3 has no FIP, can be accessed via VM1 but has no external SNAT connectivity From what I can tell, the chassis config is correct, compute05 is the hypervisor and the faulty VM has a port binding on this hypervisor: ovn-sbctl show ... Chassis "8e0fa17c-e480-4b60-9015-bd8833412561" hostname: compute05.cloud.sci.uwo.ca Encap geneve ip: "192.168.0.105" options: {csum="true"} Port_Binding "7a5257eb-caea-45bf-b48c-620c5dff4b39" Port_Binding "50e16602-78e6-429b-8c2f-e7e838ece1b4" Port_Binding "f121c9f4-c3fe-4ea9-b754-a809be95a3fd" The router has the candidate gateways, and the snat set: ovn-nbctl show 92df19a7-4ebe-43ea-b233-f4e9f5a46e7c router 92df19a7-4ebe-43ea-b233-f4e9f5a46e7c (neutron-389439b5-07f8-44b6-a35b-c76651b48be5) (aka cs3319_public_router) port lrp-44ae1753-845e-4822-9e3d-a41e0469e257 mac: "fa:16:3e:9a:db:d8" networks: ["129.100.21.94/22"] gateway chassis: [5c039d38-70b2-4ee6-9df1-596f82c68106 99facd23-ad17-4b68-a8c2-1ff6da15ac5f 1694116c-6d30-4c31-b5ea-0f411878316e 2a4bbaf9-228a-462e-8970-0cdbf59086e6 9332c61b-93e1-4a70-9547-701a014bfd98] port lrp-509bba37-fa06-42d6-9210-2342045490db mac: "fa:16:3e:ff:0f:3b" networks: ["172.31.100.1/23"] nat 11e0565a-4695-4f67-b4ee-101f1b1b9a4f external ip: "129.100.21.94" logical ip: "172.31.100.0/23" type: "snat" nat 21e4be02-d81c-46e8-8fa8-3f94edb4aed1 external ip: "129.100.21.87" logical ip: "172.31.100.49" type: "dnat_and_snat" Each network agent on the hypervisors shows the ovn controller up : OVN Controller Gateway agent | compute05.cloud.sci.uwo.ca | | :-) | UP | ovn-controller The ovs vswitch on the hypervisor looks correct afaict and ovn ports bfd status are all forwarding to other hypervisors. ie: Port ovn-2a4bba-0 Interface ovn-2a4bba-0 type: geneve options: {csum="true", key=flow, remote_ip="192.168.0.106"} bfd_status: {diagnostic="No Diagnostic", flap_count="1", forwarding="true", remote_diagnostic="No Diagnostic", remote_state=up, state=up} Any advice on where to look would be appreciated. PS. Version info: Neutron 22.0.0-1 OVN 22.12 neutron options: enable_distributed_floating_ip = true ovn_l3_scheduler = leastloaded Thanks Gary -- Gary Molenkamp Science Technology Services Systems/Cloud Administrator University of Western Ontario molenkam(a)uwo.ca http://sts.sci.uwo.ca (519) 661-2111 x86882 (519) 661-3566

5 14