Web lists-archives.com

Re: [Samba] Debian Buster, bind_dlz, and apparmor

On 11/28/2017 12:07 PM, L.P.H. van Belle via samba wrote:
Normaly i kick in sooner but im in bed fit by flu. :-(

You have to add the bind paths to the apparmor profile, or disable apparmor in total, just dont remove it, should work also.
debian wiki or ubuntu wiki shows how.

But why are you using buster, imo really not safe,  if you wany a 4.7 for stretch use my apt.

When im better i can have a look into your problem more closely.


Hi Louis,

Sorry to hear you're not feeling well.  I hope it resolves soon.

I finally got a working apparmor config for bind_dlz and Samba; it's toward the bottom of this thread.

As far as using Buster is concerned, I've found that most things work OK using Debian testing.  So, what I do is use it at home and on other nonessential systems.  This allows me to learn the things that break from an upgrade (like this one) one at a time, rather than having to figure all of them out during a full upgrade.  I am forewarned and forearmed.  In this case, I took an NT domain through the classic upgrade process and worked out those problems, only to be derailed by apparmor.  (Unrelated to Samba, but the MySQL to MariaDB upgrade has not gone well at all, but I digress......)


Op 28 nov. 2017 om 18:26 heeft Dale Schroeder via samba <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> het volgende geschreven:

On 11/28/2017 11:11 AM, Robert Wooden wrote:

Been using Ubuntu server for years in my AD. Discovered a long time
ago that apparmor is not needed for a server. (Someone is probably
going to argue the other that is should be but . . .)

Do not quote me but, I have read that AppArmor is intended more for a
desktop environment. I have always disabled and then removed AppArmor
and have never had any issues. Of course I am behind a hardware
firewall so, hopefully, no exposure to any unwanted attacks.

All my servers work fine without AppArmor.

As an Ubuntu user, my 2 cents . . .

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Dale Schroeder via samba
<samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    On 11/28/2017 9:02 AM, Rowland Penny wrote:

        On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 08:37:22 -0600
        Dale Schroeder via samba <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
        <mailto:samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

            On 11/28/2017 2:38 AM, Rowland Penny via samba wrote:

                On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 14:53:32 -0600
                Dale Schroeder via samba <samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
                <mailto:samba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

                    Last week, Debian testing (Buster) added apparmor
                    to the list of
                    dependencies for its latest kernel release,
                    apparently because
                    systemd needs it.  Recently, I noticed my first
                    casualty - bind9 -
                    due to apparmor failures with bind_dlz.

                    Knowing next to nothing about apparmor, what is
                    needed to fix this,
                    and what further info do you need from me?


                I cannot seem to find a debian kernel that has a
                dependency on
                apparmor, can you provide a link ?

                Even if debian is making the kernel depend on apparmor
                (by the way,
                does Linus know about this  ?), this isn't a Samba
                problem, it is an
                apparmor one.



            Thanks for responding.


            [ Ben Hutchings ]
                * linux-image: Recommend apparmor, as systemd units
            with an
            AppArmor profile will fail without it (Closes: #880441)

            So, although the word "recommend" implies that one has a
            choice, in
            reality, the kernel upgrade would not proceed without

        Then it is a bug, depend means it will be installed, recommend
        what it says, it is recommended to install it, but you do not
        need to.

            I suppose it would be possible to disable, but assuming
            the systemd
            warning is a harbinger of things to come, it seemed best
            to me to
            figure it out now.  I know systemd is not your thing, and I am
            inclined to agree; however, Debian sees it otherwise,
            leaving me to
            deal with it.

        Easier way out of this, stop using debian and use Devuan instead.

            I asked here because there is a wiki section devoted to
            the topic -

            Thus far, SELinux has not been forced by Debian.
            Regardless, since
            the apparmor install, I have not been able to get Bind9 to
            start if
            bind_dlz is enabled.

        As I said, apparmor has nothing to do with Samba, the same
        goes for
        selinux and, in my opinion, they should figure out how to work
        Samba, not the other way round. The page on the wiki is
        supplied as a
        service, but Samba has no real way to know if the settings are
        it relies on feedback from users.


    Likewise, I had hoped some of the Ubuntu or Red Hat-derived OS
    users would chime in.  I had previously tried several different
    incantations with no luck.  Just now, I found this, taken from

      /var/lib/samba/private/krb5.co <http://krb5.co>nf r,
      /var/lib/samba/private/dns.keytab r,
      /var/lib/samba/private/named.conf r,
      /var/lib/samba/private/dns/** rwk,
      /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/samba/** m,
      /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ldb/modules/ldb/** m,

    This dated recipe works for me where newer ones did not. BIND
    9.10.6 is happy again.  YMMV


    To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
    instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba

To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba