On Tue, 01 Sep 2015, David Rosenstrauch wrote: > On 09/01/2015 10:58 AM, Alexander Wirt wrote: > >On Tue, 01 Sep 2015, David Rosenstrauch wrote: > > > >>So what is the recommended workaround for users who are currently relying on > >>this functionality? > >either get your environment fixed, or build your own package. > > > >Alex > > Not sure what you mean by "get your environment fixed"? > > Presumably a "fixed environment" means "one that doesn't use > 'dont_blame_nrpe'". That's fair enough. But that also obviously removes > previously working functionality > > So that's exactly what I was asking: for someone who was previously making > use of this functionality, and no longer should, what might a "fixed > environment" look like? What is the recommended/more secure way to pass > parms to a remote NRPE process now? Or, if it's recommended that one not > pass parms to NRPE, what is recommended instead. nrpe has several, not fixable security problems with argument parsing. You should not use it at all. A secure alternative would be to use check_by_ssh.
> For a concrete example, I'm currently monitoring machines for disk space. > Most machines I check for at least 20% disk space free. But on machines > with large disks, 20% is excessive, so I drop that to 10%. So the 20%/10% > is a parm that I pass to NRPE. What would be the recommended way to > implement functionality like this going forward? Either use check_by_ssh or use a configuration management system like puppet to write out your nrpe configuration with different parameters. Alex
