Skip to main content

permissions - How can I share a live BZR repository with multiple users?

I'm not sure how best to ask this question. Over several years I've developed my way into a corner and need to figure some things out. I almost certainly haven't been following best practices up until now but there you go.



I make and host Django websites on my own Linux (Ubuntu) server. I manage their version control with Bazaar and upload over SSH+BZR. They all go into a parent directory imaginatively called /websites/. The production copies are just master BZR branches (not exports). I don't run any sort of FTP server, just SSH.



My workflow is I edit a local copy of a website, commit the change. Because they're all bound branches, the commit it pushed to the server automatically and that has a hook which then runs an update, which in turn decides whether or not the Django site needs to be reloaded. I've just scripted things so they work for me.



All the websites' files are owned by my user account oli. The websites currently all run under that account too.



Occasionally a client wants access to their sites that's fair enough but I'm not sure if I can do that under the current structure. I think things need to change in order to let me achieve the following things:





  • I can create a new user account for a client so that they can log in and play with their sites (and only their) sites. I do trust my clients but my other clients shouldn't be put in a position where I force them to trust each other.


  • I can still work on all the sites just as I would with my own account, ideally in one place but I'd survive if on the server they were split up based on users.


  • If possible, force the users to go through BZR so they don't mess up the production branch with silly faff that can't easily be rolled back. You know how this works: if I give a client access and something "mysteriously" stops working, it's my fault regardless of what's happened. I need to be able to track what's happening but similarly clients do need to be able to make changes without my interaction (the gatekeeper VCS model wouldn't work for me).




So assuming I can do anything to change my current setup, what's the best way of doing this?







My current thoughts are:




  • Installing a simple FTP (et al) server that runs as oli to preserve any permissions and try to coerce them into using BZR but otherwise needing to sync updates.



    If you think this is viable, is there a secure equivalent to FTP that the system sees as one user but similarly something that I can arbitrarily limit to certain directories (eg user client-a can only view a subset of the website directories).


  • Shake it up completely, use distinct SSH logins, keep websites in clients' $HOME dirs. If that gets your vote, what's my best tactic for stopping them doing anything but accessing their files? Is there a nice combination to limit ForceCommand internal-sftp with a chroot mechanism?




But I've learnt bad habits from hacking things around. How would you do this?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

linux - iDRAC6 Virtual Media native library cannot be loaded

When attempting to mount Virtual Media on a iDRAC6 IP KVM session I get the following error: I'm using Ubuntu 9.04 and: $ javaws -version Java(TM) Web Start 1.6.0_16 $ uname -a Linux aud22419-linux 2.6.28-15-generic #51-Ubuntu SMP Mon Aug 31 13:39:06 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux $ firefox -version Mozilla Firefox 3.0.14, Copyright (c) 1998 - 2009 mozilla.org On Windows + IE it (unsurprisingly) works. I've just gotten off the phone with the Dell tech support and I was told it is known to work on Linux + Firefox, albeit Ubuntu is not supported (by Dell, that is). Has anyone out there managed to mount virtual media in the same scenario?

hp proliant - Smart Array P822 with HBA Mode?

We get an HP DL360 G8 with an Smart Array P822 controller. On that controller will come a HP StorageWorks D2700 . Does anybody know, that it is possible to run the Smart Array P822 in HBA mode? I found only information about the P410i, who can run HBA. If this is not supported, what you think about the LSI 9207-8e controller? Will this fit good in that setup? The Hardware we get is used but all original from HP. The StorageWorks has 25 x 900 GB SAS 10K disks. Because the disks are not new I would like to use only 22 for raid6, and the rest for spare (I need to see if the disk count is optimal or not for zfs). It would be nice if I'm not stick to SAS in future. As OS I would like to install debian stretch with zfs 0.71 as file system and software raid. I have see that hp has an page for debian to. I would like to use hba mode because it is recommend, that zfs know at most as possible about the disk, and I'm independent from the raid controller. For us zfs have many benefits,

apache 2.2 - Server Potentially Compromised -- c99madshell

So, low and behold, a legacy site we've been hosting for a client had a version of FCKEditor that allowed someone to upload the dreaded c99madshell exploit onto our web host. I'm not a big security buff -- frankly I'm just a dev currently responsible for S/A duties due to a loss of personnel. Accordingly, I'd love any help you server-faulters could provide in assessing the damage from the exploit. To give you a bit of information: The file was uploaded into a directory within the webroot, "/_img/fck_uploads/File/". The Apache user and group are restricted such that they can't log in and don't have permissions outside of the directory from which we serve sites. All the files had 770 permissions (user rwx, group rwx, other none) -- something I wanted to fix but was told to hold off on as it wasn't "high priority" (hopefully this changes that). So it seems the hackers could've easily executed the script. Now I wasn't able