this post was submitted on 04 Sep 2026
37 points (97.4% liked)

Selfhosted

62274 readers
364 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Self cross-posting from: https://lemmy.zip/post/70909658

Intention to have slightly better visibility from the self-hosted crowd and I'm interested in more general feedback on this too.

Hey everyone! I'm trying to find a solution to a really confusing problem...

I have the following simple nginx docker compose configuration on my Fedora home server that I can run without issue on my uid 1000 user, lets call this user "userA".

services:
  nginx:
    container_name: nginx-alt
    image: docker.io/library/nginx
    restart: unless-stopped
    ports:
      - 8181:80

This exposes internal port 80 as 8181 and can be accessed in a lan in the expected matter.

However, for security reasons, I want to actually host this service eventually on a completely different user with less permissions. Let's call this user "userB" who has a very limited scope of the file system. This is to prevent potential escaping of the rootless container causing major file system havoc (i.e. reduce the scope of the user to a very limited network of containers.)

The problem is really simple: For some reason, when userB runs this service (uid 1001), the nginx service suddenly complains about privileges. As a result, I get a "Forbidden 403" error when hosting. Turning off selinux has no affect (so setenforce 0 does nothing, meaning I can rule out secure linux interruption.)

The errors look like the following:

nginx-alt  | 2026/09/04 20:03:34 [error] 25#25: *1 "/usr/share/nginx/html/index.html" is forbidden (13: Permission denied), client: xx.xx.x.x, server: localhost, request: "GET / HTTP/1.1", host: "xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:8181"
nginx-alt  | 10.89.0.2 - - [04/Sep/2026:20:03:34 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 403 153 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:155.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/155.0" "-"

For what it's worth, both users should be relatively vanilla and all ports are appropriately exported. There shouldn't be anything, for example, that is making userA run as "privileged" over the other users and podman should be running rootless in both containers.

I did see a note on the nginx image about running in rootless that I might try, but it doesn't solve my bigger issue here which is the lack of consistency between the two users. Additionally, userns_mode: keep-ids only caused the container to fail to boot for other reason entirely.

There must be something fundamentally wrong with my configuration of my system. Has anyone had any experience running two podman containers on two different users simultaneously that can provide feedback?

Obviously, I'm not trying to run just an nginx server, but I found this to be the easiest configuration to reproduce.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] glizzyguzzler@piefed.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The best way to run Podman is root with UserNS to dole out UID/GID protection. Running Podman as root allows you to share networks between containers while having the containers run under different users. If you go rootless, you'd need to run under one user to share the user's network space with all the containers you want.

As for your issue, I can't really divine what the problem is from the errors. I avoid nginx because it's coded to not play well with user abstraction and changing the user with the files it wants to write to etc. Gotta write into a ton of random folders! So not sure exactly what is up. But with Podman root it is easy to run as root 0 internally and make nginx think it has all the control it could ever want.

Try this setup (it is in Podman Quadlet format, apologies I don't know the compose versions). It runs the container as root 0 internally, externally it runs as some random UID/GID - secure! It uses Volume idmap to map the internal root 0 user to 1001 for write access to the Volume.

Note that in Debian 13 symlinks are broken and won't work with idmap, just point to the original source. If you need symlinks, I have an alternate UserNS that maps internal user root 0 to external user 1001 directly. You'd drop the idmap in Volume then and use that. You lose some extra security - now the container is running as external user 1001 instead of some random UID/GID - but that's a pretty minor hit as long as your external user doesn't have access to tons of things.

# Volumes to mount -> the @ is essential for saying "1001 is absolute and external" basically. 0 is internal. size of 1. You can map 1001 to 0 and 1002 to 1 with @1001-0-2, etc., etc., etc.  
Volume=/mnt/something:/etc/nginx/wants/to/write/here:rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev,Z,idmap=uids=@1001-0-1;gids=@1001-0-1  

# Run as user running the container  
UserNS=auto  
# [use this if req symlink b/c idmap does NOT work with symlinks] -> I tested and it is fixed in at least Podman v5.8.3, so Debian 14 will work with idmap and symlinks directly ! drop the idmap if using !  
# UserNS=auto:uidmapping=0:@1001:1,gidmapping=0:@1001:1  

# Security time  
NoNewPrivileges=true  
# https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/capabilities.7.html  
DropCapability=all  
ReadOnly=true  
ReadOnlyTmpfs=True  
# These capabilities are needed for linuxserver's s6 "launcher" thing  
#AddCapability=CAP_CHOWN  
#AddCapability=CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE  
#AddCapability=CAP_FOWNER  
#AddCapability=CAP_SETGID  
#AddCapability=CAP_SETUID  
# Needs this if the container tries to bind below port 1024. I'm not sure if it is needed if it only tries to bind internally.  
#AddCapability=CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE  

# TempFS for ReadOnly fixes I've used for nginx - may not be relevant for you. These are from getting Frigate running.  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/conf:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/logs:size=40M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/client_body_temp:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/proxy_temp:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/fastcgi_temp:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/uwsgi_temp:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /usr/local/nginx/scgi_temp:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  
PodmanArgs=--tmpfs /etc/letsencrypt:size=1M,rw,noexec,nosuid,nodev  

Root Podman and UserNS=auto needs a containers user to pull uid/gid from.

# Root Podman needs a `containers` "user" (not really a user, just a reserved uid/gid space)  
sudo echo "containers:2147483647:2147483648" >> /etc/subuid  
sudo echo "containers:2147483647:2147483648" >> /etc/subgid  

The documentation for Podman is critically lacking in the "hobbyist" space. Hope this helps.

Edit: This approach works well because most Docker containers are built assuming they'll run as root 0. That's why Linuxserver uses the S6 overlay thing to jump from root 0 to something else. The container can be built to run as any user though, if you look at the Dockerfile for the container you're using, you'll see what user they're declaring it will run as (and likely what user owns all the files). Root 0 usually gets around that problem - unless they "cleverly" code it to try to prevent you from running the container as root 0 (I've run into this before! It was Heimdall from the Linuxserver people).

Edit2: I've noticed you said no Volumes, so drop that. But you can still use the UserNS mapping to run it as root internally which should fix the internal permissions issues. The tmpfs stuff is if you declare ReadOnly for extra security - it's a great idea - but nginx is extra difficult in that regard. Disregard it while you get going.

# Run as user running the container  
UserNS=auto  

# Security time  
NoNewPrivileges=true  
# https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/capabilities.7.html  
DropCapability=all  
# These capabilities are needed for linuxserver's s6 "launcher" thing  
#AddCapability=CAP_CHOWN  
#AddCapability=CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE  
#AddCapability=CAP_FOWNER  
#AddCapability=CAP_SETGID  
#AddCapability=CAP_SETUID  
# Needs this if the container tries to bind below port 1024. I'm not sure if it is needed if it only tries to bind internally.  
#AddCapability=CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE  

Edit3:
Use sudo podman top nginx user huser group hgroup groups hgroups to see the internal user/host user (huser) mappings easily for debug.

USER	HUSER		GROUP	HGROUP		GROUPS	HGROUPS  
root		2147485695	root		2147485695	105		105  

Here's an output from my frigate container. Internally (USER) it is root, externally (HUSER) it's some random UID. I've also mapped the internal group (GROUPS) 105 to the external group (HGROUPS) 105 so that it has render access.

[–] forbiddenlake@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Note that sudo echo does not work as non root because the shell redirection is attempted before the command runs. You want echo foo | sudo tee -a /bar instead

[–] glizzyguzzler@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So the sudo echo does echo as sudo but doesn’t carry over? Makes sense damn I hate bash! Any way to keep the >>? Or do you need to tee? Cause the >> is pretty cool

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

That's the thing about computers, they do exactly what you tell them. sudo echo works, but the pipe and the redirect are interpreted by the bash shell you're in, which isn't being run with sudo.

You should also know that echo is a bash shell builtin, so the echo you're running with echo and sudo echo are two very different things.