[arch-dev-public] Preparing OpenVPN 2.4.x - possible incompatible changes

Giancarlo Razzolini grazzolini at archlinux.org
Tue Nov 29 17:00:59 UTC 2016

Em novembro 29, 2016 14:38 Christian Hesse escreveu:
> We need root privileges at initialization phase, no? Privileges are dropped
> to nobody/nobody when initialization sequence completed.
> If we can make things work with non-root system user... Let me know how to do
> that. :D

We just need root for creating the tun devices and destroying them.
I managed to make an entire unprivileged deployment.

Basically all I need is this:

ExecStartPre=-/usr/bin/openvpn --rmtun --dev tun0
ExecStartPre=/usr/bin/openvpn --mktun --dev tun0 --dev-type tun --user openvpn --group openvpn
ExecStart=/usr/bin/openvpn --cd /etc/openvpn --config %i.conf --daemon openvpn@%i --writepid /run/openvpn/openvpn@%i.pid --status-version 2

The config file doesn't need any actual user/group configuration, because
it is already started with the right user/group. It needs to use a different
iproute binary (which in my case is a script) that has sudo permissions
for the openvpn user to run the ip command as root.

> The new systemd units create this automatically. (Well,
> actually /run/openvpn-client and /run/openvpn-server.)

Nice to hear this.

> Just followed the link from our wiki [2]. Probably you can make this work,
> but I am not convinced this can be packaged to work smoothly.
> Dynamic device naming, up/route-up/... scripts, ... There is lot of stuff
> that can and will break.
> Still, if you have some clues on how to package this...

I never meant for you (us) to package such setup. I was
just making the case for a dedicated openvpn system user
and it's run directories. At least one of those is already
taken care of. If we can deploy such unprivileged systemd
units, alongside upstream official ones, it's another matter.

Personally I'm okay with all of this and I'll accommodate my
setup, no matter how openvpn gets packaged. I had to compile
openvpn for at least two release cycles because of a bug on it[0].
I think you'll probably remember that one.

Giancarlo Razzolini

[0] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/50090
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 870 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20161129/e51c438a/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list