How to check UFW status without sudo (or being root)? [duplicate]
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
This question already has an answer here:
How do I run specific sudo commands without a password?
2 answers
I'm running some scripts to check the UFW status and would like to run sudo ufw status
without having to do sudo
. I was hoping to find a firewall or ufw group to add myself to, but I didn't find any.
How can I allow any user X to do the ufw status
without being root or asking for sudo password?
UPDATE:
I wanted to try to add my own file to /etc/sudoers.d/
, but was lazy so decided to copy one already existing, like this:
sudo cp /etc/sudoers.d/mintupdate /etc/sudoers.d/firewall_status
Don't do That! You will not be able to do sudo or login again. I had to do a boot recovery. Instead use:
sudo visudo -f /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Now just follow the accepted answer below.
sudo firewall ufw
marked as duplicate by vidarlo, Charles Green, karel, Fabby, Warren Hill Feb 11 at 15:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
|
show 9 more comments
This question already has an answer here:
How do I run specific sudo commands without a password?
2 answers
I'm running some scripts to check the UFW status and would like to run sudo ufw status
without having to do sudo
. I was hoping to find a firewall or ufw group to add myself to, but I didn't find any.
How can I allow any user X to do the ufw status
without being root or asking for sudo password?
UPDATE:
I wanted to try to add my own file to /etc/sudoers.d/
, but was lazy so decided to copy one already existing, like this:
sudo cp /etc/sudoers.d/mintupdate /etc/sudoers.d/firewall_status
Don't do That! You will not be able to do sudo or login again. I had to do a boot recovery. Instead use:
sudo visudo -f /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Now just follow the accepted answer below.
sudo firewall ufw
marked as duplicate by vidarlo, Charles Green, karel, Fabby, Warren Hill Feb 11 at 15:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
Would it be an option to runsudo ufw ...
without password? I doubt that running firewall things without root privilege will work.
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:17
No, that would open a huge security hole.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:37
What would be the difference between to allow a group using ufw without and with sudo?
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:40
Well it depend on what you mean. If you mean to justchmod 777
, then I'd rather say no, as any user could disable the FW. I'm looking for a proper solution to add people to groups or add specific users/execs to some sudoers list.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:53
One doesn't needsudo
- simplyservice ufw status
– waltinator
Feb 10 at 15:28
|
show 9 more comments
This question already has an answer here:
How do I run specific sudo commands without a password?
2 answers
I'm running some scripts to check the UFW status and would like to run sudo ufw status
without having to do sudo
. I was hoping to find a firewall or ufw group to add myself to, but I didn't find any.
How can I allow any user X to do the ufw status
without being root or asking for sudo password?
UPDATE:
I wanted to try to add my own file to /etc/sudoers.d/
, but was lazy so decided to copy one already existing, like this:
sudo cp /etc/sudoers.d/mintupdate /etc/sudoers.d/firewall_status
Don't do That! You will not be able to do sudo or login again. I had to do a boot recovery. Instead use:
sudo visudo -f /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Now just follow the accepted answer below.
sudo firewall ufw
This question already has an answer here:
How do I run specific sudo commands without a password?
2 answers
I'm running some scripts to check the UFW status and would like to run sudo ufw status
without having to do sudo
. I was hoping to find a firewall or ufw group to add myself to, but I didn't find any.
How can I allow any user X to do the ufw status
without being root or asking for sudo password?
UPDATE:
I wanted to try to add my own file to /etc/sudoers.d/
, but was lazy so decided to copy one already existing, like this:
sudo cp /etc/sudoers.d/mintupdate /etc/sudoers.d/firewall_status
Don't do That! You will not be able to do sudo or login again. I had to do a boot recovery. Instead use:
sudo visudo -f /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Now just follow the accepted answer below.
This question already has an answer here:
How do I run specific sudo commands without a password?
2 answers
sudo firewall ufw
sudo firewall ufw
edited Feb 10 at 21:53
not2qubit
asked Feb 10 at 13:30
not2qubitnot2qubit
292210
292210
marked as duplicate by vidarlo, Charles Green, karel, Fabby, Warren Hill Feb 11 at 15:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by vidarlo, Charles Green, karel, Fabby, Warren Hill Feb 11 at 15:35
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
Would it be an option to runsudo ufw ...
without password? I doubt that running firewall things without root privilege will work.
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:17
No, that would open a huge security hole.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:37
What would be the difference between to allow a group using ufw without and with sudo?
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:40
Well it depend on what you mean. If you mean to justchmod 777
, then I'd rather say no, as any user could disable the FW. I'm looking for a proper solution to add people to groups or add specific users/execs to some sudoers list.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:53
One doesn't needsudo
- simplyservice ufw status
– waltinator
Feb 10 at 15:28
|
show 9 more comments
Would it be an option to runsudo ufw ...
without password? I doubt that running firewall things without root privilege will work.
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:17
No, that would open a huge security hole.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:37
What would be the difference between to allow a group using ufw without and with sudo?
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:40
Well it depend on what you mean. If you mean to justchmod 777
, then I'd rather say no, as any user could disable the FW. I'm looking for a proper solution to add people to groups or add specific users/execs to some sudoers list.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:53
One doesn't needsudo
- simplyservice ufw status
– waltinator
Feb 10 at 15:28
Would it be an option to run
sudo ufw ...
without password? I doubt that running firewall things without root privilege will work.– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:17
Would it be an option to run
sudo ufw ...
without password? I doubt that running firewall things without root privilege will work.– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:17
No, that would open a huge security hole.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:37
No, that would open a huge security hole.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:37
What would be the difference between to allow a group using ufw without and with sudo?
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:40
What would be the difference between to allow a group using ufw without and with sudo?
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:40
Well it depend on what you mean. If you mean to just
chmod 777
, then I'd rather say no, as any user could disable the FW. I'm looking for a proper solution to add people to groups or add specific users/execs to some sudoers list.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:53
Well it depend on what you mean. If you mean to just
chmod 777
, then I'd rather say no, as any user could disable the FW. I'm looking for a proper solution to add people to groups or add specific users/execs to some sudoers list.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:53
One doesn't need
sudo
- simply service ufw status
– waltinator
Feb 10 at 15:28
One doesn't need
sudo
- simply service ufw status
– waltinator
Feb 10 at 15:28
|
show 9 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Here's an /etc/sudoers.d/
file that works for me:
$ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Cmnd_Alias UFWSTATUS = /usr/sbin/ufw status
%ufwstatus ALL=NOPASSWD: UFWSTATUS
Then add the new "ufwstatus" group (here added as a system group):
sudo groupadd -r ufwstatus
Your otherwise non-privileged user must be added to the ufwstatus
group e.g.
sudo gpasswd --add testuser ufwstatus
In order for the change to take effect, the user needs to log in again:
su - testuser
Then
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status
Status: active
To Action From
-- ------ ----
22/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
3389/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
111 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
2049 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
but other ufw
commands are disallowed (even slight variants, such as status --verbose
):
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status --verbose
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw status --verbose' as root on xenial-vm.
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw disable
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw disable' as root on xenial-vm.
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic,sudo ufw enable/disable
andsudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
BTW. I am running this onMint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here's an /etc/sudoers.d/
file that works for me:
$ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Cmnd_Alias UFWSTATUS = /usr/sbin/ufw status
%ufwstatus ALL=NOPASSWD: UFWSTATUS
Then add the new "ufwstatus" group (here added as a system group):
sudo groupadd -r ufwstatus
Your otherwise non-privileged user must be added to the ufwstatus
group e.g.
sudo gpasswd --add testuser ufwstatus
In order for the change to take effect, the user needs to log in again:
su - testuser
Then
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status
Status: active
To Action From
-- ------ ----
22/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
3389/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
111 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
2049 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
but other ufw
commands are disallowed (even slight variants, such as status --verbose
):
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status --verbose
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw status --verbose' as root on xenial-vm.
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw disable
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw disable' as root on xenial-vm.
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic,sudo ufw enable/disable
andsudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
BTW. I am running this onMint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
add a comment |
Here's an /etc/sudoers.d/
file that works for me:
$ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Cmnd_Alias UFWSTATUS = /usr/sbin/ufw status
%ufwstatus ALL=NOPASSWD: UFWSTATUS
Then add the new "ufwstatus" group (here added as a system group):
sudo groupadd -r ufwstatus
Your otherwise non-privileged user must be added to the ufwstatus
group e.g.
sudo gpasswd --add testuser ufwstatus
In order for the change to take effect, the user needs to log in again:
su - testuser
Then
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status
Status: active
To Action From
-- ------ ----
22/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
3389/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
111 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
2049 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
but other ufw
commands are disallowed (even slight variants, such as status --verbose
):
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status --verbose
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw status --verbose' as root on xenial-vm.
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw disable
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw disable' as root on xenial-vm.
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic,sudo ufw enable/disable
andsudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
BTW. I am running this onMint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
add a comment |
Here's an /etc/sudoers.d/
file that works for me:
$ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Cmnd_Alias UFWSTATUS = /usr/sbin/ufw status
%ufwstatus ALL=NOPASSWD: UFWSTATUS
Then add the new "ufwstatus" group (here added as a system group):
sudo groupadd -r ufwstatus
Your otherwise non-privileged user must be added to the ufwstatus
group e.g.
sudo gpasswd --add testuser ufwstatus
In order for the change to take effect, the user needs to log in again:
su - testuser
Then
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status
Status: active
To Action From
-- ------ ----
22/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
3389/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
111 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
2049 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
but other ufw
commands are disallowed (even slight variants, such as status --verbose
):
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status --verbose
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw status --verbose' as root on xenial-vm.
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw disable
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw disable' as root on xenial-vm.
Here's an /etc/sudoers.d/
file that works for me:
$ sudo cat /etc/sudoers.d/ufwstatus
Cmnd_Alias UFWSTATUS = /usr/sbin/ufw status
%ufwstatus ALL=NOPASSWD: UFWSTATUS
Then add the new "ufwstatus" group (here added as a system group):
sudo groupadd -r ufwstatus
Your otherwise non-privileged user must be added to the ufwstatus
group e.g.
sudo gpasswd --add testuser ufwstatus
In order for the change to take effect, the user needs to log in again:
su - testuser
Then
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status
Status: active
To Action From
-- ------ ----
22/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
3389/tcp ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
111 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
2049 ALLOW 192.168.1.0/24
but other ufw
commands are disallowed (even slight variants, such as status --verbose
):
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw status --verbose
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw status --verbose' as root on xenial-vm.
testuser@xenial-vm:~$ sudo ufw disable
Sorry, user testuser is not allowed to execute '/usr/sbin/ufw disable' as root on xenial-vm.
edited Feb 10 at 21:54
not2qubit
292210
292210
answered Feb 10 at 19:19
steeldriversteeldriver
70.7k11115187
70.7k11115187
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic,sudo ufw enable/disable
andsudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
BTW. I am running this onMint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
add a comment |
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic,sudo ufw enable/disable
andsudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
BTW. I am running this onMint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)
su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic, sudo ufw enable/disable
and sudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Thank you! Exactly what I was looking for. This solved my problem with the small differences that: (1)
su - testuser
didn't work, so I needed to reboot in order for the new group and sudoers policy to take place. (2) Funny and contrary to logic, sudo ufw enable/disable
and sudo ufw status verbose
now also works without password.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 21:45
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
Nice answer - and avoids the "too much permission" problem!
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:27
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
@CharlesGreen thanks - although I'm concerned by the OP's comment above asserting that it does allow passwordless ufw enable/disable: I don't believe it should
– steeldriver
Feb 10 at 22:31
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
I hadn't noticed that - I would have to try this in my VM
– Charles Green
Feb 10 at 22:33
BTW. I am running this on
Mint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
BTW. I am running this on
Mint 19.1 (Xfce)
, if that matters.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 22:37
add a comment |
Would it be an option to run
sudo ufw ...
without password? I doubt that running firewall things without root privilege will work.– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:17
No, that would open a huge security hole.
– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:37
What would be the difference between to allow a group using ufw without and with sudo?
– Thomas
Feb 10 at 14:40
Well it depend on what you mean. If you mean to just
chmod 777
, then I'd rather say no, as any user could disable the FW. I'm looking for a proper solution to add people to groups or add specific users/execs to some sudoers list.– not2qubit
Feb 10 at 14:53
One doesn't need
sudo
- simplyservice ufw status
– waltinator
Feb 10 at 15:28