New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Too many firewall rules leads to: Error starting VM: (0, 'Error') #1570

Open
desci opened this Issue Jan 2, 2016 · 10 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@desci

desci commented Jan 2, 2016

EDIT: This trace is irrelevant. See comment 4. The only relevant thing is the number of firewall rules of the AppVM, it has a 35 rules cap.


Steps:

  • AppVM previously known as work-somename;
  • Another work AppVM did existed (the one created at install), it was renamed to work-clone;
  • AppVM work-somename renamed to work;
  • The AppVM refused starting and raised Error starting VM 'work': (0, 'Error');
  • AppVM work renamed to work-personal;
  • AppVM work-clone renamed back to work;
  • Error persisted;
  • AppVM work-personal renamed back to work-somename;
  • Error persisted;

When I try to start the AppVM in any way, it is left with a gray led in the QubesManager, it can't be stopped or paused, only started. When I try to start it for the second time, the led turns to yellow and now I can either pause or stop the AppVM.

After I do this with this particular AppVM, whenever I try to start any other AppVM, the same error occurs, therefore rendering the system unusable.

That was the github VM, I had to login here from a DispVM.

I have not tried the cli manager, only the graphical QubesManager and the KDE menu.

EDIT: removing irrelevant, long logs (please use gist/attach next time)

@desci

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@desci

desci Jan 2, 2016

[SOLVED] not really, see next comment below

I have removed entries using top level domain .se from the AppVM's firewall and the error vanished.

Not closing this issue because it seems that this is serious, how come the firewall rules wreck the entire system? (From an end user's perspective)

desci commented Jan 2, 2016

[SOLVED] not really, see next comment below

I have removed entries using top level domain .se from the AppVM's firewall and the error vanished.

Not closing this issue because it seems that this is serious, how come the firewall rules wreck the entire system? (From an end user's perspective)

@desci

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@desci

desci Jan 2, 2016

Now there seems to be nothing to do with the .se top level domain.

I have added new .org rules to the firewall and the same error applies, and now it seems to be about adding too much entries, taking into account all entries of all AppVMs.

Erasing a whole firewall rules from another VM (was about 20 entries) seemed to "solve" for now. Unless I need those rules again.

desci commented Jan 2, 2016

Now there seems to be nothing to do with the .se top level domain.

I have added new .org rules to the firewall and the same error applies, and now it seems to be about adding too much entries, taking into account all entries of all AppVMs.

Erasing a whole firewall rules from another VM (was about 20 entries) seemed to "solve" for now. Unless I need those rules again.

@desci

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@desci

desci Jan 2, 2016

I'm wrong yet again.

This seem to happen when I try to save the AppVM's firewall rules with more than 35 entries.

desci commented Jan 2, 2016

I'm wrong yet again.

This seem to happen when I try to save the AppVM's firewall rules with more than 35 entries.

@marmarek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@marmarek

marmarek Jan 4, 2016

Member

What Qubes version are you using? I guess R2, right?

Member

marmarek commented Jan 4, 2016

What Qubes version are you using? I guess R2, right?

@marmarek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@marmarek

marmarek Jan 4, 2016

Member

Hmm, or maybe R3.0. In which case it would be similar to this:
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/55CF8DF8.8050505%40riseup.net

Member

marmarek commented Jan 4, 2016

Hmm, or maybe R3.0. In which case it would be similar to this:
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/55CF8DF8.8050505%40riseup.net

@marmarek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@marmarek

marmarek Jan 4, 2016

Member

If that's the case, I see two things here:

  • lack of clear indication of firewall rules count limit (bug)
  • too low limit (feature request)
Member

marmarek commented Jan 4, 2016

If that's the case, I see two things here:

  • lack of clear indication of firewall rules count limit (bug)
  • too low limit (feature request)
@desci

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

desci commented Jan 6, 2016

@marmarek
It's R3.

@marmarek marmarek changed the title from Error starting VM: (0, 'Error') to Too many firewall rules leads to: Error starting VM: (0, 'Error') Jan 19, 2016

@3hhh

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@3hhh

3hhh Nov 3, 2016

Still valid in 3.2.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Create a ProxyVM.
  2. Add 40 firewall entries via Qubes VM manager or directly via firewall.xml (I just tested it with different IPs and Port 443/TCP), defaults all disallowed.
  3. Start the VM (works).
  4. Stop the VM, add another rule.
  5. Start the VM (doesn't work, aforementioned error occurs).

3hhh commented Nov 3, 2016

Still valid in 3.2.

Steps to reproduce:

  1. Create a ProxyVM.
  2. Add 40 firewall entries via Qubes VM manager or directly via firewall.xml (I just tested it with different IPs and Port 443/TCP), defaults all disallowed.
  3. Start the VM (works).
  4. Stop the VM, add another rule.
  5. Start the VM (doesn't work, aforementioned error occurs).

unman added a commit to unman/qubes-doc that referenced this issue Nov 8, 2016

@unman unman referenced this issue in QubesOS/qubes-doc Nov 8, 2016

Merged

Update qubes-firewall.md-include limit on iptables #212

@marmarek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@marmarek

marmarek Nov 19, 2016

Member

This is already fixed for Qubes 4.0. The fix is not feasible for backport (it's incompatible change). The limitation is already documented.

Member

marmarek commented Nov 19, 2016

This is already fixed for Qubes 4.0. The fix is not feasible for backport (it's incompatible change). The limitation is already documented.

@andrewdavidwong

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@andrewdavidwong

andrewdavidwong Jun 20, 2018

Member

Reopening due to #4018.

Member

andrewdavidwong commented Jun 20, 2018

Reopening due to #4018.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment