sparklyballs Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 the diagnostics tool still includes my email address in the syslog file. Jun 3 07:29:32 Unraid-Nas emhttp: /usr/bin/tail -n 42 -f /var/log/syslog 2>&1 Jun 3 07:38:22 Unraid-Nas php: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix/notifications/agents/Pushover.sh Jun 3 07:38:23 Unraid-Nas php: {"status":1,"request":"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"} Jun 3 07:38:48 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Creating SSL connection to host Jun 3 07:38:49 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: SSL connection using xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jun 3 07:38:51 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Sent mail for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (221 2.0.0 closing connection fs9sm30173301wjc.34 - gsmtp) uid=0 username=root outbytes=641 Jun 3 07:42:36 Unraid-Nas kernel: docker0: port 2(veth67c8319) entered disabled state obviously i replaced the actual email address with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and also the pushover request and some sha256 reference (wasn't sure what they were, but i xxxxx'ed them anyways) Link to comment
interwebtech Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Under our new Disk Shares tab, I am not sure Cache drive should show "Mounted, underlying device has redundancy/protection" icon? Unless its a pool (raid1)? Mine is a single SSD. Link to comment
garycase Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Under our new Disk Shares tab, I am not sure Cache drive should show "Mounted, underlying device has redundancy/protection" icon? Unless its a pool (raid1)? Mine is a single SSD. Clearly there's a bug in the display for this attribute => as I noted earlier, my protected array (no cache) with a single share shows the share with a yellow triangle by it, which indicates "Some or all files are on unprotected storage." I'd expect that status if the share was cached and some files for it existed on a non-protected cache; but not when there's no cache drive and everything is written to a protected array. Link to comment
heffe2001 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Has anyone else lost the ability to see Docker logs? It opens the popup window, but never receives any data. Tried running the command-line version, and didn't get any output either (I've left the popup window up for an hour+ and no data filled). Link to comment
interwebtech Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Has anyone else lost the ability to see Docker logs? It opens the popup window, but never receives any data. Tried running the command-line version, and didn't get any output either (I've left the popup window up for an hour+ and no data filled). Checked Plex & PlexWatch dockers and both show log on popup under both Advanced & Basic views. Link to comment
bonienl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 the diagnostics tool still includes my email address in the syslog file. Jun 3 07:29:32 Unraid-Nas emhttp: /usr/bin/tail -n 42 -f /var/log/syslog 2>&1 Jun 3 07:38:22 Unraid-Nas php: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix/notifications/agents/Pushover.sh Jun 3 07:38:23 Unraid-Nas php: {"status":1,"request":"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"} Jun 3 07:38:48 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Creating SSL connection to host Jun 3 07:38:49 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: SSL connection using xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jun 3 07:38:51 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Sent mail for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (221 2.0.0 closing connection fs9sm30173301wjc.34 - gsmtp) uid=0 username=root outbytes=641 Jun 3 07:42:36 Unraid-Nas kernel: docker0: port 2(veth67c8319) entered disabled state obviously i replaced the actual email address with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and also the pushover request and some sha256 reference (wasn't sure what they were, but i xxxxx'ed them anyways) Good points. I look into sanitizing the syslog before saving. Link to comment
bonienl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Has anyone else lost the ability to see Docker logs? It opens the popup window, but never receives any data. Tried running the command-line version, and didn't get any output either (I've left the popup window up for an hour+ and no data filled). Docker logs work for me as before, i.e. info present. Link to comment
limetech Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 the diagnostics tool still includes my email address in the syslog file. Jun 3 07:29:32 Unraid-Nas emhttp: /usr/bin/tail -n 42 -f /var/log/syslog 2>&1 Jun 3 07:38:22 Unraid-Nas php: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix/notifications/agents/Pushover.sh Jun 3 07:38:23 Unraid-Nas php: {"status":1,"request":"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"} Jun 3 07:38:48 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Creating SSL connection to host Jun 3 07:38:49 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: SSL connection using xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jun 3 07:38:51 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Sent mail for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (221 2.0.0 closing connection fs9sm30173301wjc.34 - gsmtp) uid=0 username=root outbytes=641 Jun 3 07:42:36 Unraid-Nas kernel: docker0: port 2(veth67c8319) entered disabled state obviously i replaced the actual email address with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and also the pushover request and some sha256 reference (wasn't sure what they were, but i xxxxx'ed them anyways) I'll add a warning that we cannot guarantee no personal info will be in the system log if you have any 3rd party plugins installed. Link to comment
limetech Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 Under our new Disk Shares tab, I am not sure Cache drive should show "Mounted, underlying device has redundancy/protection" icon? Unless its a pool (raid1)? Mine is a single SSD. Yeah that's a bug. Link to comment
bkastner Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I have a GUI question... Should the information on pages not try and re-locate based on window size? For example, if I am on the Main tab, and Array Operations and I choose to either Stop the Array or Spin Up/Down disks I have to scroll down through a bunch of whitespace before I see the actual activities at the bottom of the window. Should this not treat the bottom of my browser window as the bottom of the page and display the info there? It seems like the page has a defined length that is independent of the amount of data on the page, or the size of the browser window. It's minor, but it's somewhat annoying. Hopefully this makes sense. Link to comment
trurl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I have a GUI question... Should the information on pages not try and re-locate based on window size? For example, if I am on the Main tab, and Array Operations and I choose to either Stop the Array or Spin Up/Down disks I have to scroll down through a bunch of whitespace before I see the actual activities at the bottom of the window. Should this not treat the bottom of my browser window as the bottom of the page and display the info there? It seems like the page has a defined length that is independent of the amount of data on the page, or the size of the browser window. It's minor, but it's somewhat annoying. Hopefully this makes sense. I've never seen this. Have you cleared browser cache? Are you using tabbed view? What web browser? Link to comment
CHBMB Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 On the GUI front, I'd like to see the docker page edited to get the port mappings on one line At the moment it looks like this on my laptop (1366x768) & my desktop (1920x1080) EDIT: Using Chrome on Windows 8, works ok on Firefox & IE Link to comment
bonienl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I have a GUI question... Should the information on pages not try and re-locate based on window size? For example, if I am on the Main tab, and Array Operations and I choose to either Stop the Array or Spin Up/Down disks I have to scroll down through a bunch of whitespace before I see the actual activities at the bottom of the window. Should this not treat the bottom of my browser window as the bottom of the page and display the info there? It seems like the page has a defined length that is independent of the amount of data on the page, or the size of the browser window. It's minor, but it's somewhat annoying. Hopefully this makes sense. All information is placed immediately at the top without additional whitespace. What browser are you using and is it PC or smart-phone/tablet ? Link to comment
trurl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 On the GUI front, I'd like to see the docker page edited to get the port mappings on one line At the moment it looks like this on my laptop (1366x768) & my desktop (1920x1080) That makes me think of another useful thing (or maybe this is the point of your idea). When we are configuring dockers it would be very useful to know what ports are already used. Something in the actual docker edit window to let us know which ports are already taken. Link to comment
CHBMB Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 That makes me think of another useful thing (or maybe this is the point of your idea). When we are configuring dockers it would be very useful to know what ports are already used. Something in the actual docker edit window to let us know which ports are already taken. Yeah, I've suggested this somewhere before. Link to comment
bkastner Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I have a GUI question... Should the information on pages not try and re-locate based on window size? For example, if I am on the Main tab, and Array Operations and I choose to either Stop the Array or Spin Up/Down disks I have to scroll down through a bunch of whitespace before I see the actual activities at the bottom of the window. Should this not treat the bottom of my browser window as the bottom of the page and display the info there? It seems like the page has a defined length that is independent of the amount of data on the page, or the size of the browser window. It's minor, but it's somewhat annoying. Hopefully this makes sense. All information is placed immediately at the top without additional whitespace. What browser are you using and is it PC or smart-phone/tablet ? I am using Chrome on a Win10 PC as historically I've had the best experience with it. Here is what I see: As you can likely tell, I had to scroll down to see the bottom. Since others don't see this I tried in Microsoft Edge and it appears as expected. I've flushed all the browsing content from Chrome, and still the same results. Link to comment
CHBMB Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 I am using Chrome on a Win10 PC as historically I've had the best experience with it. Here is what I see: As you can likely tell, I had to scroll down to see the bottom. Since others don't see this I tried in Microsoft Edge and it appears as expected. I've flushed all the browsing content from Chrome, and still the same results. I'm using Chrome on Windows 8 & mine appears normally as one would expect it to. Link to comment
archedraft Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It looks like you are viewing your unRAID GUI through unMENU? If yes, maybe test the view through unRAID direct? Mine doesn't do that and I am using Chrome on Win 8 Link to comment
CHBMB Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It looks like you are viewing your unRAID GUI through unMENU? If yes, maybe test the view through unRAID direct? Mine doesn't do that and I am using Chrome on Win 8 Good pickup archedraft, I just assumed he'd changed the port.. Link to comment
RobJ Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 the diagnostics tool still includes my email address in the syslog file. Jun 3 07:29:32 Unraid-Nas emhttp: /usr/bin/tail -n 42 -f /var/log/syslog 2>&1 Jun 3 07:38:22 Unraid-Nas php: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix/notifications/agents/Pushover.sh Jun 3 07:38:23 Unraid-Nas php: {"status":1,"request":"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"} Jun 3 07:38:48 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Creating SSL connection to host Jun 3 07:38:49 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: SSL connection using xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jun 3 07:38:51 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Sent mail for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (221 2.0.0 closing connection fs9sm30173301wjc.34 - gsmtp) uid=0 username=root outbytes=641 Jun 3 07:42:36 Unraid-Nas kernel: docker0: port 2(veth67c8319) entered disabled state obviously i replaced the actual email address with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and also the pushover request and some sha256 reference (wasn't sure what they were, but i xxxxx'ed them anyways) Good points. I look into sanitizing the syslog before saving. I'm not crazy about sanitizing the syslogs, but will accept it if that's what others want. First, it slows the process down, second - it does nothing for those other methods of capturing the syslog, and third - why is it that important, what abuse is possible? And would it not be better to sanitize at the source, when necessary? As in make sure that email and notification tools are careful what they log. I agree it's good as a general policy to limit email address exposure, but I'm not convinced there's a vulnerability here yet, when they are only exposed in attached files, not in text on a web site. Happy to learn from others... For my part, I'm completely committed to protecting all users privacy, will do all in my power to never take advantage of anything I may inadvertently notice. And I trust and hope all others will do the same. Is that enough, I don't know. Off-topic but related, I have never seen the point in hiding drive serial numbers. While there are serial numbers that are associated with private stuff, many serial numbers are just unique identifiers, that's all, and useless for anything else. Hard drive serial numbers fall into that last category, and I'm completely happy to expose mine. But I certainly don't know everything, so it's *almost* conceivable that a hacker somewhere has figured out how to take advantage of someone else's drive serial number. Can't imagine for what though, so until I do, I won't hide them. Link to comment
bonienl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 the diagnostics tool still includes my email address in the syslog file. Jun 3 07:29:32 Unraid-Nas emhttp: /usr/bin/tail -n 42 -f /var/log/syslog 2>&1 Jun 3 07:38:22 Unraid-Nas php: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix/notifications/agents/Pushover.sh Jun 3 07:38:23 Unraid-Nas php: {"status":1,"request":"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"} Jun 3 07:38:48 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Creating SSL connection to host Jun 3 07:38:49 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: SSL connection using xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jun 3 07:38:51 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Sent mail for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (221 2.0.0 closing connection fs9sm30173301wjc.34 - gsmtp) uid=0 username=root outbytes=641 Jun 3 07:42:36 Unraid-Nas kernel: docker0: port 2(veth67c8319) entered disabled state obviously i replaced the actual email address with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and also the pushover request and some sha256 reference (wasn't sure what they were, but i xxxxx'ed them anyways) Good points. I look into sanitizing the syslog before saving. I'm not crazy about sanitizing the syslogs, but will accept it if that's what others want. First, it slows the process down, second - it does nothing for those other methods of capturing the syslog, and third - why is it that important, what abuse is possible? And would it not be better to sanitize at the source, when necessary? As in make sure that email and notification tools are careful what they log. I agree it's good as a general policy to limit email address exposure, but I'm not convinced there's a vulnerability here yet, when they are only exposed in attached files, not in text on a web site. Happy to learn from others... For my part, I'm completely committed to protecting all users privacy, will do all in my power to never take advantage of anything I may inadvertently notice. And I trust and hope all others will do the same. Is that enough, I don't know. Off-topic but related, I have never seen the point in hiding drive serial numbers. While there are serial numbers that are associated with private stuff, many serial numbers are just unique identifiers, that's all, and useless for anything else. Hard drive serial numbers fall into that last category, and I'm completely happy to expose mine. But I certainly don't know everything, so it's *almost* conceivable that a hacker somewhere has figured out how to take advantage of someone else's drive serial number. Can't imagine for what though, so until I do, I won't hide them. I have added the following code to the diagnostics script: sed -r 's/\S+@\S+\.\S+/[email protected]/;s/(username|password)([=:])\S+/\\1\\2xxx/' $file|todos >/$diag/log/".basename($file).".txt" This would change an email address into [email protected], and username=xxx, password=xxx (if existing) Doesn't really slowdown the file generation ... Link to comment
bonienl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It looks like you are viewing your unRAID GUI through unMENU? If yes, maybe test the view through unRAID direct? Mine doesn't do that and I am using Chrome on Win 8 Good pickup archedraft, I just assumed he'd changed the port.. Yes this is happening because the GUI is viewed from within unMenu. Use native display instead. Link to comment
bkastner Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 It looks like you are viewing your unRAID GUI through unMENU? If yes, maybe test the view through unRAID direct? Mine doesn't do that and I am using Chrome on Win 8 Winner, winner, chicken dinner! It is indeed an UnMenu issue! It appears normally if I go to the GUI direct. I have just used UnMenu as a default for so long I didn't even think to try without it. It would be interesting to still understand if it's just me, or an issue with others through UnMenu. Thanks for suggesting that though. Link to comment
trurl Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 the diagnostics tool still includes my email address in the syslog file. Jun 3 07:29:32 Unraid-Nas emhttp: /usr/bin/tail -n 42 -f /var/log/syslog 2>&1 Jun 3 07:38:22 Unraid-Nas php: /boot/config/plugins/dynamix/notifications/agents/Pushover.sh Jun 3 07:38:23 Unraid-Nas php: {"status":1,"request":"xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"} Jun 3 07:38:48 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Creating SSL connection to host Jun 3 07:38:49 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: SSL connection using xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Jun 3 07:38:51 Unraid-Nas sSMTP[26761]: Sent mail for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (221 2.0.0 closing connection fs9sm30173301wjc.34 - gsmtp) uid=0 username=root outbytes=641 Jun 3 07:42:36 Unraid-Nas kernel: docker0: port 2(veth67c8319) entered disabled state obviously i replaced the actual email address with xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and also the pushover request and some sha256 reference (wasn't sure what they were, but i xxxxx'ed them anyways) Good points. I look into sanitizing the syslog before saving. I'm not crazy about sanitizing the syslogs, but will accept it if that's what others want. First, it slows the process down, second - it does nothing for those other methods of capturing the syslog, and third - why is it that important, what abuse is possible? And would it not be better to sanitize at the source, when necessary? As in make sure that email and notification tools are careful what they log. I agree it's good as a general policy to limit email address exposure, but I'm not convinced there's a vulnerability here yet, when they are only exposed in attached files, not in text on a web site. Happy to learn from others... For my part, I'm completely committed to protecting all users privacy, will do all in my power to never take advantage of anything I may inadvertently notice. And I trust and hope all others will do the same. Is that enough, I don't know. Off-topic but related, I have never seen the point in hiding drive serial numbers. While there are serial numbers that are associated with private stuff, many serial numbers are just unique identifiers, that's all, and useless for anything else. Hard drive serial numbers fall into that last category, and I'm completely happy to expose mine. But I certainly don't know everything, so it's *almost* conceivable that a hacker somewhere has figured out how to take advantage of someone else's drive serial number. Can't imagine for what though, so until I do, I won't hide them. I can imagine some scenarios where you would sanitize exactly the information needed to diagnose a problem. In fact, email is one of those. Plenty of people had trouble setting up their email with various hosts. If you sanitize at the source, then there would be no way to get the unsanitized version so if you are going to sanitize maybe it would be best to sanitize in this diagnostic download so the unsanitized version could still be obtained the old way. What would be sanitized? I guess email address makes some sense. I don't think passwords get logged normally unless some third party addon does it. What else? There was another user recently who was concerned with posting a syslog because it had IP addresses in it. I don't think they realized that local IPs are not unique. I see bonienl was already busy while I was writing this. Link to comment
limetech Posted June 3, 2015 Author Share Posted June 3, 2015 I'm not a fan of trying to 'sanitize' the syslog. The syslog entries should be sanitized if necessary by whatever is generating them. For example, when a user changes their password the 'passwd' command shows up in the syslog but I take great care to display '****' for the actual password. The problem is going to be: someone will install a 3rd party plugin/app which our sanitizer won't catch - that person will post the zip file publicly and we will be the ones that catch hell because of it. Link to comment
Recommended Posts