[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Angelo Compagnucci]

Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log)
and bans IPs that show malicious behaviours.

Signed-off-by: Angelo Compagnucci <angelo@amarulasolutions.com>
---
Changes:
v1->v2: 
* Adding sha256 for license file
* getting service file for systemd from source directory

 package/Config.in              |  1 +
 package/fail2ban/Config.in     | 14 ++++++++++++++
 package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban   | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash |  3 +++
 package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 69 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 package/fail2ban/Config.in
 create mode 100644 package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
 create mode 100644 package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash
 create mode 100644 package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk

diff --git a/package/Config.in b/package/Config.in
index f5a1749..1783ab9 100644
--- a/package/Config.in
+++ b/package/Config.in
@@ -1740,6 +1740,7 @@ menu "Networking applications"
 	source "package/ejabberd/Config.in"
 	source "package/ethtool/Config.in"
 	source "package/faifa/Config.in"
+	source "package/fail2ban/Config.in"
 	source "package/fastd/Config.in"
 	source "package/fcgiwrap/Config.in"
 	source "package/flannel/Config.in"
diff --git a/package/fail2ban/Config.in b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cf82526
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+config BR2_PACKAGE_FAIL2BAN
+	bool "fail2ban"
+	depends on BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON
+	help
+	  Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log) and bans IPs
+	  that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking
+	  for exploits, etc. Out of the box Fail2Ban comes with filters for
+	  various services (apache, courier, ssh, etc).
+
+	  Fail2Ban is able to reduce the rate of incorrect authentications
+	  attempts however it cannot eliminate the risk that weak authentication
+	  presents.
+
+	  https://www.fail2ban.org
diff --git a/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..92559e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+
+case "$1" in
+	start)
+		printf "Starting fail2ban: "
+		start-stop-daemon -S -q -m -p /run/fail2ban.pid \
+			-b -x fail2ban-server -- -xf start
+		[ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
+		;;
+	stop)
+		printf "Stopping fail2ban: "
+		start-stop-daemon -K -q -p /run/fail2ban.pid
+		[ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
+		;;
+	restart)
+		"$0" stop
+		sleep 1
+		"$0" start
+		;;
+	*)
+		echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop|restart}"
+		;;
+esac
diff --git a/package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash b/package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4b59091
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# sha256 locally computed
+sha256  7ee3fd0e94d58c94298718b25e6bcfa96932712b7aa683580e162403f68d40c8  fail2ban-0.10.3.1.tar.gz
+sha256  a75fec0260742fe6275d63ff6a5d97b924b28766558306b3fa4069763096929b  COPYING
diff --git a/package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk b/package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cc6961f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+################################################################################
+#
+# fail2ban
+#
+################################################################################
+
+FAIL2BAN_VERSION = 0.10.3.1
+FAIL2BAN_SITE = $(call github,fail2ban,fail2ban,$(FAIL2BAN_VERSION))
+FAIL2BAN_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
+FAIL2BAN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
+FAIL2BAN_SETUP_TYPE = setuptools
+FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = --root=$(TARGET_DIR) --prefix=/usr
+
+define FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_INIT_SYSV
+	$(INSTALL) -D -m 755 package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban \
+		$(TARGET_DIR)/etc/init.d/S60fail2ban
+endef
+
+define FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_INIT_SYSTEMD
+	$(INSTALL) -D -m 0644 $(@D)/files/fail2ban.service.in \
+		$(TARGET_DIR)/usr/lib/systemd/system/fail2ban.service
+	mkdir -p $(TARGET_DIR)/etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants
+	ln -fs ../../../../usr/lib//systemd/system/fail2ban.service \
+		$(TARGET_DIR)/etc/systemd/system/multi-user.target.wants/fail2ban.service
+	$(SED) 's/@BINDIR@/\/usr\/bin/g' $(TARGET_DIR)/usr/lib/systemd/system/fail2ban.service
+endef
+
+$(eval $(python-package))
-- 
2.7.4

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

+Yegor in Cc. Yegor: read all the way to the end, there is a question
about the python-package infrastructure.

On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:41:52 +0200, Angelo Compagnucci wrote:
> Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log)
> and bans IPs that show malicious behaviours.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Angelo Compagnucci <angelo@amarulasolutions.com>

I was about to apply this patch (I even made a few minor fixes), but
there is one thing that made me change my mind, see below. I will also
list the minor issues.

>  package/Config.in              |  1 +
>  package/fail2ban/Config.in     | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban   | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash |  3 +++
>  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Entry in DEVELOPERS file missing.

> diff --git a/package/fail2ban/Config.in b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..cf82526
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> +config BR2_PACKAGE_FAIL2BAN
> +	bool "fail2ban"
> +	depends on BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON

Are you sure it doesn't work with Python 3.x ? The fail2ban
github page says it does.

> +	help
> +	  Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log) and bans IPs
> +	  that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking
> +	  for exploits, etc. Out of the box Fail2Ban comes with filters for
> +	  various services (apache, courier, ssh, etc).
> +
> +	  Fail2Ban is able to reduce the rate of incorrect authentications
> +	  attempts however it cannot eliminate the risk that weak authentication
> +	  presents.

Aren't some of those lines too long? Could you verify with check-package

> +
> +	  https://www.fail2ban.org

Please add a Config.in comment about the Python dependency.

> diff --git a/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..92559e9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +
> +case "$1" in
> +	start)
> +		printf "Starting fail2ban: "
> +		start-stop-daemon -S -q -m -p /run/fail2ban.pid \

Put the PID file in /var/run, to be consistent with most of our other
init scripts.

> +			-b -x fail2ban-server -- -xf start
> +		[ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
> +		;;
> +	stop)
> +		printf "Stopping fail2ban: "
> +		start-stop-daemon -K -q -p /run/fail2ban.pid

Ditto.


> +FAIL2BAN_VERSION = 0.10.3.1
> +FAIL2BAN_SITE = $(call github,fail2ban,fail2ban,$(FAIL2BAN_VERSION))
> +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
> +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
> +FAIL2BAN_SETUP_TYPE = setuptools
> +FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = --root=$(TARGET_DIR) --prefix=/usr

So here is the one thing that made me change my mind. I was wondering:
why do we need to pass those options in the fail2ban package? Why
aren't they passed by the python-package infrastructure?

Turns out that the Python package infrastructure is doing this:

PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
	--prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
	--executable=/usr/bin/python \
	--single-version-externally-managed \
	--root=/

PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
	--prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \
	--executable=/usr/bin/python \
	--single-version-externally-managed \
	--root=/

This looks pretty wrong, and it seems like we should be using:

	--prefix=/usr \
	--root=$(TARGET_DIR)

and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
case in fail2ban.mk.

Thanks!

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Yegor Yefremov]

Hi Thomas, Angelo,

On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:05 AM Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> +Yegor in Cc. Yegor: read all the way to the end, there is a question
> about the python-package infrastructure.
>
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:41:52 +0200, Angelo Compagnucci wrote:
> > Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log)
> > and bans IPs that show malicious behaviours.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Angelo Compagnucci <angelo@amarulasolutions.com>
>
> I was about to apply this patch (I even made a few minor fixes), but
> there is one thing that made me change my mind, see below. I will also
> list the minor issues.
>
> >  package/Config.in              |  1 +
> >  package/fail2ban/Config.in     | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >  package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban   | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash |  3 +++
> >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Entry in DEVELOPERS file missing.
>
> > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/Config.in b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..cf82526
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> > +config BR2_PACKAGE_FAIL2BAN
> > +     bool "fail2ban"
> > +     depends on BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON
>
> Are you sure it doesn't work with Python 3.x ? The fail2ban
> github page says it does.
>
> > +     help
> > +       Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log) and bans IPs
> > +       that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking
> > +       for exploits, etc. Out of the box Fail2Ban comes with filters for
> > +       various services (apache, courier, ssh, etc).
> > +
> > +       Fail2Ban is able to reduce the rate of incorrect authentications
> > +       attempts however it cannot eliminate the risk that weak authentication
> > +       presents.
>
> Aren't some of those lines too long? Could you verify with check-package
>
> > +
> > +       https://www.fail2ban.org
>
> Please add a Config.in comment about the Python dependency.
>
> > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..92559e9
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > +#!/bin/sh
> > +
> > +case "$1" in
> > +     start)
> > +             printf "Starting fail2ban: "
> > +             start-stop-daemon -S -q -m -p /run/fail2ban.pid \
>
> Put the PID file in /var/run, to be consistent with most of our other
> init scripts.
>
> > +                     -b -x fail2ban-server -- -xf start
> > +             [ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
> > +             ;;
> > +     stop)
> > +             printf "Stopping fail2ban: "
> > +             start-stop-daemon -K -q -p /run/fail2ban.pid
>
> Ditto.
>
>
> > +FAIL2BAN_VERSION = 0.10.3.1
> > +FAIL2BAN_SITE = $(call github,fail2ban,fail2ban,$(FAIL2BAN_VERSION))
> > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
> > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
> > +FAIL2BAN_SETUP_TYPE = setuptools
> > +FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = --root=$(TARGET_DIR) --prefix=/usr
>
> So here is the one thing that made me change my mind. I was wondering:
> why do we need to pass those options in the fail2ban package? Why
> aren't they passed by the python-package infrastructure?
>
> Turns out that the Python package infrastructure is doing this:
>
> PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
>         --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
>         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
>         --single-version-externally-managed \
>         --root=/
>
> PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
>         --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \
>         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
>         --single-version-externally-managed \
>         --root=/
>
> This looks pretty wrong, and it seems like we should be using:
>
>         --prefix=/usr \
>         --root=$(TARGET_DIR)
>
> and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
> any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
> like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
> case in fail2ban.mk.

I've applied this hack:

diff --git a/package/pkg-python.mk b/package/pkg-python.mk
index f57e486dad..fcb7309ef9 100644
--- a/package/pkg-python.mk
+++ b/package/pkg-python.mk
@@ -66,10 +66,10 @@ PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_ENV = \
        _python_exec_prefix=/usr

 PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
-       --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
+       --prefix=/usr \
        --executable=/usr/bin/python \
        --single-version-externally-managed \
-       --root=/
+       --root=$(TARGET_DIR)

 PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
        --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \

And performed some tests with following packages (both via python
"console" and using packe own scripts like watchmedo or miniterm.py):

python-serial, python-watchdog, python-cryptography, python-pytablewriter

So far I haven't experienced any issues.

Regards,
Yegor

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 11:47:36 +0200, Yegor Yefremov wrote:
> > and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
> > any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
> > like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
> > case in fail2ban.mk.  
> 
> I've applied this hack:

Why do you say "hack" ? It should be the right thing, compared to what
we're doing today.

> diff --git a/package/pkg-python.mk b/package/pkg-python.mk
> index f57e486dad..fcb7309ef9 100644
> --- a/package/pkg-python.mk
> +++ b/package/pkg-python.mk
> @@ -66,10 +66,10 @@ PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_ENV = \
>         _python_exec_prefix=/usr
> 
>  PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
> -       --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
> +       --prefix=/usr \
>         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
>         --single-version-externally-managed \
> -       --root=/
> +       --root=$(TARGET_DIR)
> 
>  PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
>         --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \

It should also be fixed in the staging installation commands, which
have the same problem.

> And performed some tests with following packages (both via python
> "console" and using packe own scripts like watchmedo or miniterm.py):
> 
> python-serial, python-watchdog, python-cryptography, python-pytablewriter
> 
> So far I haven't experienced any issues.

Great, thanks for doing this test! I think it would be a nice thing to
fix.

Angelo: just curious, for fail2ban, what made you realize you had to
override the --prefix and --root values ?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Angelo Compagnucci]

Thomas, Yegor,
On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:52 AM Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2018 11:47:36 +0200, Yegor Yefremov wrote:
> > > and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
> > > any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
> > > like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
> > > case in fail2ban.mk.
> >
> > I've applied this hack:
>
> Why do you say "hack" ? It should be the right thing, compared to what
> we're doing today.
>
> > diff --git a/package/pkg-python.mk b/package/pkg-python.mk
> > index f57e486dad..fcb7309ef9 100644
> > --- a/package/pkg-python.mk
> > +++ b/package/pkg-python.mk
> > @@ -66,10 +66,10 @@ PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_ENV = \
> >         _python_exec_prefix=/usr
> >
> >  PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
> > -       --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
> > +       --prefix=/usr \
> >         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
> >         --single-version-externally-managed \
> > -       --root=/
> > +       --root=$(TARGET_DIR)
> >
> >  PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
> >         --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \
>
> It should also be fixed in the staging installation commands, which
> have the same problem.
>
> > And performed some tests with following packages (both via python
> > "console" and using packe own scripts like watchmedo or miniterm.py):
> >
> > python-serial, python-watchdog, python-cryptography, python-pytablewriter
> >
> > So far I haven't experienced any issues.
>
> Great, thanks for doing this test! I think it would be a nice thing to
> fix.
>
> Angelo: just curious, for fail2ban, what made you realize you had to
> override the --prefix and --root values ?

Python setuptools installs data_files into python_root, so the
fail2ban setup.py failed blatantly in buildroot trying to writing
something to /etc/fail2ban instead of $(TARGET_DIR)/etc/fail2ban.

I'm glad it will be fixed globally, I honestly thought it was like
that for a reason!

Sincerely, Angelo

>
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Angelo Compagnucci]

Hi Thomas,
Il giorno mar 11 set 2018 alle ore 00:05 Thomas Petazzoni
<thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> ha scritto:
>
> Hello,
>
> +Yegor in Cc. Yegor: read all the way to the end, there is a question
> about the python-package infrastructure.
>
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:41:52 +0200, Angelo Compagnucci wrote:
> > Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log)
> > and bans IPs that show malicious behaviours.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Angelo Compagnucci <angelo@amarulasolutions.com>
>
> I was about to apply this patch (I even made a few minor fixes), but
> there is one thing that made me change my mind, see below. I will also
> list the minor issues.
>
> >  package/Config.in              |  1 +
> >  package/fail2ban/Config.in     | 14 ++++++++++++++
> >  package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban   | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash |  3 +++
> >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Entry in DEVELOPERS file missing.
>
> > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/Config.in b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..cf82526
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> > +config BR2_PACKAGE_FAIL2BAN
> > +     bool "fail2ban"
> > +     depends on BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON
>
> Are you sure it doesn't work with Python 3.x ? The fail2ban
> github page says it does.

Probably it say so, but simply trying to run the software with python3:

  File "/home/angelo/DEV/BUILDROOT/br_qemu_arm/build/fail2ban-0.10.4/fail2ban/__init__.py",
line 85, in _init
    for i in xrange(50):
NameError: name 'xrange' is not defined

>
> > +     help
> > +       Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log) and bans IPs
> > +       that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking
> > +       for exploits, etc. Out of the box Fail2Ban comes with filters for
> > +       various services (apache, courier, ssh, etc).
> > +
> > +       Fail2Ban is able to reduce the rate of incorrect authentications
> > +       attempts however it cannot eliminate the risk that weak authentication
> > +       presents.
>
> Aren't some of those lines too long? Could you verify with check-package
>
> > +
> > +       https://www.fail2ban.org
>
> Please add a Config.in comment about the Python dependency.
>
> > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..92559e9
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > +#!/bin/sh
> > +
> > +case "$1" in
> > +     start)
> > +             printf "Starting fail2ban: "
> > +             start-stop-daemon -S -q -m -p /run/fail2ban.pid \
>
> Put the PID file in /var/run, to be consistent with most of our other
> init scripts.
>
> > +                     -b -x fail2ban-server -- -xf start
> > +             [ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
> > +             ;;
> > +     stop)
> > +             printf "Stopping fail2ban: "
> > +             start-stop-daemon -K -q -p /run/fail2ban.pid
>
> Ditto.
>
>
> > +FAIL2BAN_VERSION = 0.10.3.1
> > +FAIL2BAN_SITE = $(call github,fail2ban,fail2ban,$(FAIL2BAN_VERSION))
> > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
> > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
> > +FAIL2BAN_SETUP_TYPE = setuptools
> > +FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = --root=$(TARGET_DIR) --prefix=/usr
>
> So here is the one thing that made me change my mind. I was wondering:
> why do we need to pass those options in the fail2ban package? Why
> aren't they passed by the python-package infrastructure?
>
> Turns out that the Python package infrastructure is doing this:
>
> PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
>         --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
>         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
>         --single-version-externally-managed \
>         --root=/
>
> PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
>         --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \
>         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
>         --single-version-externally-managed \
>         --root=/
>
> This looks pretty wrong, and it seems like we should be using:
>
>         --prefix=/usr \
>         --root=$(TARGET_DIR)
>
> and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
> any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
> like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
> case in fail2ban.mk.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> https://bootlin.com
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot



-- 
Profile: http://it.linkedin.com/in/compagnucciangelo

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Yegor Yefremov]

Hi Angelo,

On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 12:28 AM Angelo Compagnucci
<angelo.compagnucci@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Thomas,
> Il giorno mar 11 set 2018 alle ore 00:05 Thomas Petazzoni
> <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> ha scritto:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > +Yegor in Cc. Yegor: read all the way to the end, there is a question
> > about the python-package infrastructure.
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:41:52 +0200, Angelo Compagnucci wrote:
> > > Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log)
> > > and bans IPs that show malicious behaviours.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Angelo Compagnucci <angelo@amarulasolutions.com>
> >
> > I was about to apply this patch (I even made a few minor fixes), but
> > there is one thing that made me change my mind, see below. I will also
> > list the minor issues.
> >
> > >  package/Config.in              |  1 +
> > >  package/fail2ban/Config.in     | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > >  package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban   | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash |  3 +++
> > >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > Entry in DEVELOPERS file missing.
> >
> > > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/Config.in b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..cf82526
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> > > +config BR2_PACKAGE_FAIL2BAN
> > > +     bool "fail2ban"
> > > +     depends on BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON
> >
> > Are you sure it doesn't work with Python 3.x ? The fail2ban
> > github page says it does.
>
> Probably it say so, but simply trying to run the software with python3:
>
>   File "/home/angelo/DEV/BUILDROOT/br_qemu_arm/build/fail2ban-0.10.4/fail2ban/__init__.py",
> line 85, in _init
>     for i in xrange(50):
> NameError: name 'xrange' is not defined

This was fixed in [1], but it seems like if you'll have wait till the
next release.

[1] https://github.com/fail2ban/fail2ban/commit/657b147c0d7830f3600f3dc7feaa4815a7e19fde#diff-ac23116c0e156f1acc787e57fe98391c

Yegor

> >
> > > +     help
> > > +       Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log) and bans IPs
> > > +       that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking
> > > +       for exploits, etc. Out of the box Fail2Ban comes with filters for
> > > +       various services (apache, courier, ssh, etc).
> > > +
> > > +       Fail2Ban is able to reduce the rate of incorrect authentications
> > > +       attempts however it cannot eliminate the risk that weak authentication
> > > +       presents.
> >
> > Aren't some of those lines too long? Could you verify with check-package
> >
> > > +
> > > +       https://www.fail2ban.org
> >
> > Please add a Config.in comment about the Python dependency.
> >
> > > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..92559e9
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > > +#!/bin/sh
> > > +
> > > +case "$1" in
> > > +     start)
> > > +             printf "Starting fail2ban: "
> > > +             start-stop-daemon -S -q -m -p /run/fail2ban.pid \
> >
> > Put the PID file in /var/run, to be consistent with most of our other
> > init scripts.
> >
> > > +                     -b -x fail2ban-server -- -xf start
> > > +             [ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
> > > +             ;;
> > > +     stop)
> > > +             printf "Stopping fail2ban: "
> > > +             start-stop-daemon -K -q -p /run/fail2ban.pid
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
> >
> > > +FAIL2BAN_VERSION = 0.10.3.1
> > > +FAIL2BAN_SITE = $(call github,fail2ban,fail2ban,$(FAIL2BAN_VERSION))
> > > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
> > > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
> > > +FAIL2BAN_SETUP_TYPE = setuptools
> > > +FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = --root=$(TARGET_DIR) --prefix=/usr
> >
> > So here is the one thing that made me change my mind. I was wondering:
> > why do we need to pass those options in the fail2ban package? Why
> > aren't they passed by the python-package infrastructure?
> >
> > Turns out that the Python package infrastructure is doing this:
> >
> > PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
> >         --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
> >         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
> >         --single-version-externally-managed \
> >         --root=/
> >
> > PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
> >         --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \
> >         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
> >         --single-version-externally-managed \
> >         --root=/
> >
> > This looks pretty wrong, and it seems like we should be using:
> >
> >         --prefix=/usr \
> >         --root=$(TARGET_DIR)
> >
> > and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
> > any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
> > like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
> > case in fail2ban.mk.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Thomas
> > --
> > Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> > https://bootlin.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > buildroot mailing list
> > buildroot at busybox.net
> > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>
>
>
> --
> Profile: http://it.linkedin.com/in/compagnucciangelo
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH v2] package/fail2ban: new package

[Angelo Compagnucci]

Dear Yegor,
Il giorno ven 30 nov 2018 alle ore 09:54 Yegor Yefremov
<yegorslists@googlemail.com> ha scritto:
>
> Hi Angelo,
>
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 12:28 AM Angelo Compagnucci
> <angelo.compagnucci@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Thomas,
> > Il giorno mar 11 set 2018 alle ore 00:05 Thomas Petazzoni
> > <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com> ha scritto:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > +Yegor in Cc. Yegor: read all the way to the end, there is a question
> > > about the python-package infrastructure.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:41:52 +0200, Angelo Compagnucci wrote:
> > > > Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log)
> > > > and bans IPs that show malicious behaviours.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Angelo Compagnucci <angelo@amarulasolutions.com>
> > >
> > > I was about to apply this patch (I even made a few minor fixes), but
> > > there is one thing that made me change my mind, see below. I will also
> > > list the minor issues.
> > >
> > > >  package/Config.in              |  1 +
> > > >  package/fail2ban/Config.in     | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > > >  package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban   | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.hash |  3 +++
> > > >  package/fail2ban/fail2ban.mk   | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > > Entry in DEVELOPERS file missing.
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/Config.in b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 0000000..cf82526
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/package/fail2ban/Config.in
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> > > > +config BR2_PACKAGE_FAIL2BAN
> > > > +     bool "fail2ban"
> > > > +     depends on BR2_PACKAGE_PYTHON
> > >
> > > Are you sure it doesn't work with Python 3.x ? The fail2ban
> > > github page says it does.
> >
> > Probably it say so, but simply trying to run the software with python3:
> >
> >   File "/home/angelo/DEV/BUILDROOT/br_qemu_arm/build/fail2ban-0.10.4/fail2ban/__init__.py",
> > line 85, in _init
> >     for i in xrange(50):
> > NameError: name 'xrange' is not defined
>
> This was fixed in [1], but it seems like if you'll have wait till the
> next release.

Yes I know and meanwhile I submitted a PR to disable installation of
tests files hoping that the next release contains both fixes, but as
far as I can tell the project has a load of backlog!

Thanks!

>
> [1] https://github.com/fail2ban/fail2ban/commit/657b147c0d7830f3600f3dc7feaa4815a7e19fde#diff-ac23116c0e156f1acc787e57fe98391c
>
> Yegor
>
> > >
> > > > +     help
> > > > +       Fail2ban scans log files (e.g. /var/log/apache/error_log) and bans IPs
> > > > +       that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking
> > > > +       for exploits, etc. Out of the box Fail2Ban comes with filters for
> > > > +       various services (apache, courier, ssh, etc).
> > > > +
> > > > +       Fail2Ban is able to reduce the rate of incorrect authentications
> > > > +       attempts however it cannot eliminate the risk that weak authentication
> > > > +       presents.
> > >
> > > Aren't some of those lines too long? Could you verify with check-package
> > >
> > > > +
> > > > +       https://www.fail2ban.org
> > >
> > > Please add a Config.in comment about the Python dependency.
> > >
> > > > diff --git a/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 0000000..92559e9
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/package/fail2ban/S60fail2ban
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
> > > > +#!/bin/sh
> > > > +
> > > > +case "$1" in
> > > > +     start)
> > > > +             printf "Starting fail2ban: "
> > > > +             start-stop-daemon -S -q -m -p /run/fail2ban.pid \
> > >
> > > Put the PID file in /var/run, to be consistent with most of our other
> > > init scripts.
> > >
> > > > +                     -b -x fail2ban-server -- -xf start
> > > > +             [ $? = 0 ] && echo "OK" || echo "FAIL"
> > > > +             ;;
> > > > +     stop)
> > > > +             printf "Stopping fail2ban: "
> > > > +             start-stop-daemon -K -q -p /run/fail2ban.pid
> > >
> > > Ditto.
> > >
> > >
> > > > +FAIL2BAN_VERSION = 0.10.3.1
> > > > +FAIL2BAN_SITE = $(call github,fail2ban,fail2ban,$(FAIL2BAN_VERSION))
> > > > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+
> > > > +FAIL2BAN_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING
> > > > +FAIL2BAN_SETUP_TYPE = setuptools
> > > > +FAIL2BAN_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = --root=$(TARGET_DIR) --prefix=/usr
> > >
> > > So here is the one thing that made me change my mind. I was wondering:
> > > why do we need to pass those options in the fail2ban package? Why
> > > aren't they passed by the python-package infrastructure?
> > >
> > > Turns out that the Python package infrastructure is doing this:
> > >
> > > PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_TARGET_OPTS = \
> > >         --prefix=$(TARGET_DIR)/usr \
> > >         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
> > >         --single-version-externally-managed \
> > >         --root=/
> > >
> > > PKG_PYTHON_SETUPTOOLS_INSTALL_STAGING_OPTS = \
> > >         --prefix=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \
> > >         --executable=/usr/bin/python \
> > >         --single-version-externally-managed \
> > >         --root=/
> > >
> > > This looks pretty wrong, and it seems like we should be using:
> > >
> > >         --prefix=/usr \
> > >         --root=$(TARGET_DIR)
> > >
> > > and ditto for the staging installation, of course. Yegor, do you see
> > > any drawback with doing this change in pkg-python.mk ? To me, it seems
> > > like the right thing to do, and would avoid the need to have a special
> > > case in fail2ban.mk.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Thomas
> > > --
> > > Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
> > > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> > > https://bootlin.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > buildroot mailing list
> > > buildroot at busybox.net
> > > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Profile: http://it.linkedin.com/in/compagnucciangelo
> > _______________________________________________
> > buildroot mailing list
> > buildroot at busybox.net
> > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot



-- 
Profile: http://it.linkedin.com/in/compagnucciangelo