RHEL has some questions/answers forum behind their paywall. As you have RHEL somebody within your organization should have an account with access to it.
Linux
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Its not a paywall. You can register for free and look up all the articles but of course wont get customer support. @OP maybe ask your questions just here, I bet most linux enterprise dudes got their fingers alot on RHEL/CentOS, me included.
Thank you, I've now asked my question within this same thread: https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/1840823
Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Thanks! Yes, I have access to their community. I wasn't sure if that was the best place to ask though. Their community software is a bit clunky, and sometimes official forums are not always the best place to ask.
Just now saw the comment with the link to your question, disregard my last comment. 😁
No problem, thanks for the suggestions!
Maybe you have a problem with a specific open source product which is an upstream of a RH product, then the open source product will have their own community forum, e.g. the RH product Satellite and the open source community The Foreman. Or directly in some kind of CentOS or Fedora forum for OS problems. But it will probably fastest if you just open a ticket with RH for your problem.
There's nothing wrong with asking it here. You may not get an answer if it's something specific to RH that those here don't know about, but I can't imagine anyone will give you crap for it.
It's easier to direct you to the right place knowing what the question is too.
Just be careful not to put any sensitive information in the question if it's regarding corporate hosts
Thank you, I've now asked my question within this same thread: https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/1840823
Here's my question, if anyone reading this post knows the answer: the simple version is... is it safe to enable the rhel-7-server-rhceph-4-tools-rpms repository?
To give a little more detail: old versions of modules that come from the Ceph package got flagged by our security scan. It appears that Ceph is installed by default on RHEL 7, but the repository above which I believe will update these modules, is not enabled by default. This seems odd to me, and the documentation for Ceph mentions that the EPEL repository should be disabled. It doesn't appear that this repository is enabled, but this still made me concerned about why the Ceph repository isn't enabled by default, hence my question.
Edit: I will try to contact Red Hat support to confirm the best course of action, like some have suggested on this thread. Thank you everyone for your help.
Edit 2: I figured out a course of action to take. The vulnerabilities were flagged for the librados2 and librbd1 packages. I used the command "rpm -q --whatrequires " to navigate the dependencies of these two packages to end at libvirt. Using the same command with libvirt, I was able to determine that no other package is dependent on it. Thus, it appears to me that I can address the issue by uninstalling all 3 packages. This seems safer and more secure than addressing the issue by enabling a new repository on the server. To be safe, I will take a snapshot of the VM before making the changes. I'll post another update afterward.
You might want to check the errata for the packages your scanning tools complained about. Rhel will keep stable versions at the same release version, but backport security fixes in.
Many security scanners are stupid about this.
Since it is rhel, you have a support contract, right? What do they say?
You might want to check the errata for the packages your scanning tools complained about. Rhel will keep stable versions at the same release version, but backport security fixes in.
Thanks. I had verified that there is an errata before posting here. I presume that it hasn't been installed due to that repository being disabled, but maybe I'm mistaken?
Many security scanners are stupid about this.
Indeed. In the process of researching this I found a related KB article from Red Hat that basically said that the security scanner is not supposed to flag this.
Since it is rhel, you have a support contract, right? What do they say?
I'm positive we have a support contract, but I've never had to use it, so I'm not familiar with the process. I'm not one of the main linux admins here. If I can't find the answer either here or from my own research, I'll look into the process to open a case.
Thanks again.
Final update on this issue. I found out about the "rpm -q --whatrequires " command and used that to navigate the dependency chain for the modules in question. I was able to determine that those modules were ultimately not being used for anything. Once I confirmed that, I removed the modules. So far so good. It didn't cause any issues to the services on that server. I will find out if it resolved the vulnerability that had been flagged by the security scanner next time it runs, probably at the end of the month.