Interactive Shell with the underlying system

rubyonrails-talk
1

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...]

Jeah thought of Webmin and i know it, but i don´t know that there would be an interactiv shell within webmin?

Well, you should look for it before concluding that there isn't one! In fact, Webmin has just such a thing, although it's not very well implemented.

So does Slicehost, although I don't know if their solution is open-source.

So that thing and some other things bring me up to my own one.. :slight_smile:

Dude. Not with Rails. Maybe Merb or Sinatra?

Greetings Kaji

Best,

2

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...] > Jeah thought of Webmin and i know it, but i don´t know that there would > be an interactiv shell within webmin?

Well, you should look for it before concluding that there isn't one! In fact, Webmin has just such a thing, although it's not very well implemented.

3

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...]

Hello guys,

thanks for u reply. Ok there is something with ssh, sorry that i haven´t searched for it. But i may have something without ssh or else, something that would be more direct. In the case of taking ssh i could take an Webservice too. But i think an direct aproach would be much nicer.

SSH is direct. What else do you need?

But there seems nothing really nice to be out there, isn´t it?

What are you looking for?

Marnen Laibow-Koser : Would be the improvment in taking Merb or Senatra?

They're lighter-weight frameworks. You probably don't need much of Rails' feature set, so there's no point in using Rails.

Would there be an aproach?

Huh?

Best,

4

Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote:

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...]

Hello guys,

thanks for u reply. Ok there is something with ssh, sorry that i haven´t searched for it. But i may have something without ssh or else, something that would be more direct. In the case of taking ssh i could take an Webservice too. But i think an direct aproach would be much nicer.

SSH is direct. What else do you need?

I mean, for SSH i need an SSH deamon an make an extra "connection". When i use ruby with whatever webserver / engine i use ruby already, so when i can direct commanding and get output, it would be an directer aproach for me, isn it?

But there seems nothing really nice to be out there, isn´t it?

What are you looking for?

see above

Marnen Laibow-Koser : Would be the improvment in taking Merb or Senatra?

They're lighter-weight frameworks. You probably don't need much of Rails' feature set, so there's no point in using Rails.

Would there be an aproach?

Huh?

Best, -- Marnen Laibow-Koser http://www.marnen.org marnen@marnen.org

Greetings Kaji

5

Daniel Ernst wrote:

Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote:

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...]

Hello guys,

thanks for u reply. Ok there is something with ssh, sorry that i haven´t searched for it. But i may have something without ssh or else, something that would be more direct. In the case of taking ssh i could take an Webservice too. But i think an direct aproach would be much nicer.

SSH is direct. What else do you need?

I mean, for SSH i need an SSH deamon an make an extra "connection". When i use ruby with whatever webserver / engine i use ruby already, so when i can direct commanding and get output, it would be an directer aproach for me, isn it?

No. If that were possible, it would be a huge security hole on your server -- you really don't want the user to be able to hijack an HTTP session and run arbitrary shell commands. SSH is the proper solution.

Best,

6

Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote:

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...]

Marnen Laibow-Koser: Jeah it is maked for it, but i think http can be quite save too

No. For one thing, the Web app will be running as the wrong user.

and things to do without vpn is even, not the right thing.

VPN doesn't come into it. There is *no way* to make this secure without something like SSH. If you try to go through HTTP, you run the real risk of COMPLETELY WRECKING YOUR SYSTEM. If you don't know why this is so, then you do not understand the security issues involved well enough to have any business writing this.

SSH is the proper solution. Anything else is INCREDIBLY UNSAFE.

Jeah i think we are quite a litte bit off topic here. But i mean, whats wrong with HTTPS and above of that Kerberos authentification? SSH isn better encryptet as HTTPS.

Back to Topic Aldric Giacomoni aproach sounds really interessting, so does it work? Or where do i have to start?

Oh, don´t sorry i don´t bag u for a complet solution, i am just searching for the right hint.

Greetings Kaji

7

Daniel Ernst wrote: [...]

Jeah i think we are quite a litte bit off topic here. But i mean, whats wrong with HTTPS and above of that Kerberos authentification? SSH isn better encryptet as HTTPS.

The issue is not one of encryption, but of authentication. HTTP simply doesn't provide the user model that you need.

Back to Topic Aldric Giacomoni aproach sounds really interessting, so does it work? Or where do i have to start?

Don't use it. Use SSH.

Oh, don´t sorry i don´t bag u for a complet solution, i am just searching for the right hint.

SSH is a complete solution. You've been told this several times. It is the right hint. Your idea is DANGEROUS. Do not implement it unless you are SURE that you can deal with the security issues.

Once more: use SSH. Completely forget about your HTTP idea v

8

This is certainly an interesting idea, though I agree with others that this could very quickly turn ugly. That said, I think the code you're looking for is %x[some command]. Jay Fields has a good bit on it here: Jay Fields' Thoughts: Ruby Kernel system, exec and %x

In short, %x[command] will run command on the shell and return the output. e.g., result = %x[uptime] result #=> "13:16 up 4 days, 1:30, 2 users, load averages: 0.39 0.29 0.23\n"

Best of luck, Jeff Tucker