XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    XCP-ng 8.3 updates announcements and testing

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    380 Posts 42 Posters 155.5k Views 58 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • A Online
      acebmxer @olivierlambert
      last edited by acebmxer

      @olivierlambert Created new topic.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
      • gduperreyG Offline
        gduperrey Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
        last edited by

        New update candidate for you to test!

        A new update for the Xen packages is ready, which brings a significant improvement in live migration performance on AMD systems under heavy load, that we add to the previous batch of updates for a common publication.


        Maintenance updates

        • xen: Improve migration performance on AMD systems under heavy load.

        Test on XCP-ng 8.3

        yum clean metadata --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing,xcp-ng-candidates
        yum update --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing,xcp-ng-candidates
        reboot
        

        The usual update rules apply: pool coordinator first, etc.

        Versions:

        • xen: 4.17.6-4.1.xcpng8.3

        What to test

        Normal use and anything else you want to test. If you have a pool with AMD processors, we're interested in your feedback regarding live migration under heavy load.

        Test window before official release of the updates

        ~4/5 days

        A F 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 4
        • A Offline
          Andrew Top contributor @gduperrey
          last edited by

          @gduperrey The new OpenSSL/SSH blocks existing/working RSA keys from older SSH clients. While you can still use a password for SSH, it will block old keys from working which will break things (not good for existing LTS installs). To maintain compatibility add PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms +ssh-rsa to /etc/ssh/sshd_config

          gduperreyG rzrR 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • F Offline
            flakpyro @gduperrey
            last edited by

            @gduperrey Tested this on the same hosts i already have running the testing updates from earlier. No issues. Mixture of AMD and Intel.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
            • gduperreyG Offline
              gduperrey Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @Andrew
              last edited by

              @Andrew I just pinged Philippe (rzr) internally to ask him to look into this 🙂

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • rzrR Offline
                rzr Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @Andrew
                last edited by rzr

                @Andrew said:

                @gduperrey The new OpenSSL/SSH blocks existing/working RSA keys from older SSH clients. While you can still use a password for SSH, it will block old keys from working which will break things (not good for existing LTS installs). To maintain compatibility add PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms +ssh-rsa to /etc/ssh/sshd_config

                Hi @andrew, thank you for your feedback, the fallback option you're suggesting will work but it will downgrade the security of your system, we suggested to update clients:

                "Note that older ssh-clients (with weak ciphers) will need to update, if connection is rejected."

                Let me make it more explicit that older keys should be also refreshed:

                  ssh-keygen # To generate new $identity_file 
                  ssh-copy-id \
                        -i $identity_file \
                        -o HostKeyAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa \
                        -o PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms=+ssh-rsa \
                        $user@$host
                  ssh $user@$host
                

                Ideally this can be done before the update, but let's us think if we have a better strategy to provide a smoother experience, meanwhile if anyone is curious please check:

                https://www.openssh.org/releasenotes.html

                https://www.openssh.org/txt/release-8.8

                "We recommend enabling RSA/SHA1 only as a stopgap measure until legacy
                implementations can be upgraded or reconfigured with another key type
                (such as ECDSA or Ed25519)."

                https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8332

                As I understand, RSA is safe unless it was coupled with SHA1 hash function which was then decoupled in later versions (and then obsoleted in V_8_7_P1-4-g234475025 with https://github.com/openssh/openssh-portable/commit/2344750250247111a6c3c6a4fe84ed583a61cc11 "The use of RSA/SHA1 can be re-enabled by adding "ssh-rsa" to the
                PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms directives on the client and server.") .

                Regen keys will be needed, better sooner than later, meanwhile we could support weak keys clients during a short (TBD) deprecation period.

                Update: I think I was able to reproduce the issue @andrew reported using a RSA key generated with
                OpenSSH_5.1p1 Debian-6.maemo2, OpenSSL 0.9.8e 23 Feb 2007

                ssh-keygen -lf ~/.ssh/id_rsa.pub
                2048 SHA256:abcde+0123456789012345678901234567890/vwxyz user@Nokia-N810-43-7 (RSA)
                

                Used along a later client (in a debian chroot jessie amd64) :
                OpenSSH_6.7p1 Debian-5+deb8u4, OpenSSL 1.0.1t 3 May 2016

                While it worked as expected (in a debian chroot stretch amd64) : with:
                OpenSSH_7.4p1 Debian-10+deb9u7, OpenSSL 1.0.2u 20 Dec 2019

                So to conclude using rsa keys need ssh-7+ while ssh6 can be used using stronger cypher like id_ed25519 (not rsa).

                PS: this post may be updated

                0 djmdjm committed to openssh/openssh-portable
                upstream: After years of forewarning, disable the RSA/SHA-1
                
                signature algorithm by default. It is feasible to create colliding SHA1
                hashes, so we need to deprecate its use.
                
                RSA/SHA-256/512 remains available and will be transparently selected
                instead of RSA/SHA1 for most SSH servers released in the last five+
                years. There is no need to regenerate RSA keys.
                
                The use of RSA/SHA1 can be re-enabled by adding "ssh-rsa" to the
                PubkeyAcceptedAlgorithms directives on the client and server.
                
                ok dtucker deraadt
                
                OpenBSD-Commit-ID: 189bcc4789c7254e09e23734bdd5def8354ff1d5
                psafontP 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stormiS Offline
                  stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                  last edited by stormi

                  Although disabling ssh-rsa is the right thing to do from a security perspective, we'll see what we can do to smoothen the transition.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • psafontP Offline
                    psafont Vates 🪐 XAPI & Network Team @rzr
                    last edited by psafont

                    @rzr said:

                    Hi @andrew, thank you for your feedback, the fallback option you're suggesting will work but it will downgrade the security of your system, we suggested to update clients:

                    If users need to take action, I would rather recommend users to do something that raises the security floor, like generating new keys with newer, future-looking ciphers, like ed25519:

                    ssh-keygen -t ed25519 -C "<email>"
                    for server in $servers do ; ssh-copy-id $server; done
                    
                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • G Offline
                      gb.123
                      last edited by gb.123

                      Hello,
                      After updating I get this:

                      xcp-ng-error.png

                      This seems harmless as I don't have and scsi drive attached. But these messages were not there before.

                      Other than that, the server seems to boot fine.

                      Regards,

                      PS:
                      I have updated once for several updates (not one by one) so this messages may also be there in previous updates and may not be related to this particular update.

                      rzrR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • rzrR Offline
                        rzr Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @gb.123
                        last edited by rzr

                        @gb.123 said:

                        Wrong diagnostic page; asked for 1 got 8
                        Failed to get diagnostic page 0x1
                        Failed to bind enclosure -19
                        

                        be there in previous updates and may not be related to this particular update.

                        I think you're right because the issue you are facing is reported by kernel itself (which was not updated), Can you please share more details about the hardware you're using (is any USB device involved ? try smartmon tools too) eventually post details in other sections of forum.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0

                        Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                        Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                        With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                        Register Login
                        • First post
                          Last post