Update Dockerfile.django* to use gid 4242

[AdamJoelNichols]

The gid set for the image is currently 1337. This collides with istio, a popular k8s traffic management, telemetry, and security tool, which also uses gid 1337 to rewrite iptables so that it can do its magic.

This results in DefectDojo's initializer being unable to connect to postgresql.

Original bug issue: github.com/DefectDojo/django-DefectDojo/issues/7532 Test results

No test updates required, I don't believe. I did not see any that validated or made use of the current gid.

Manual testing: Brought up DefectDojo within a cluster that makes use of istio. Fails to connect to postgresql before gid change. Succeeds in its connection after gid update.

[dryrunsecurity[bot]]

DryRun Security Summary

The provided code changes are related to the Dockerfiles for a Django-based application, focusing on setting up the application's runtime environment within Docker containers, and the changes appear to follow good security practices, but there are several areas that should be reviewed and monitored to ensure the ongoing security of the application.

Expand for full summary

Summary:

The provided code changes are related to the Dockerfiles for a Django-based application, specifically the Dockerfile.django-debian and Dockerfile.django-alpine files. The changes focus on setting up the application's runtime environment within Docker containers, including the installation of dependencies, user and group management, and the configuration of various environment variables and entrypoint scripts.

From an application security perspective, the Dockerfiles appear to follow good security practices, such as using a dedicated application user, managing file permissions, and separating application components. However, there are several areas that should be reviewed and monitored to ensure the ongoing security of the application:

1. Dependency Management: The application's dependencies, as specified in the requirements.txt file, should be kept up-to-date and regularly scanned for known security vulnerabilities.
2. Secure Environment Variables: The environment variables used to configure the application, including sensitive information like admin user credentials, should be properly managed and secured, either through environment variable management tools or by injecting them at runtime.
3. Secure Entrypoint Scripts: The entrypoint scripts responsible for starting the various application components should be reviewed for any potential security issues, such as command injection vulnerabilities or improper input validation.
4. Static File Handling: The handling of static files, such as those stored in the components/node_modules directory, should be reviewed to ensure they are properly secured and that any user-uploaded content is sanitized and validated to prevent potential security issues, such as cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities.
5. Comprehensive Security Review: While the Dockerfiles appear to follow good security practices, it's essential to review the entire application stack, including the Django application code, to ensure a comprehensive security posture.

Files Changed:

1. Dockerfile.django-debian:

   • The change updates the group ID (GID) from 1337 to 4242, which could be related to the application's user and group management.
   • The Dockerfile sets up a standard Django-based application running in a Docker container, including the installation of dependencies, copying of application code, and configuration of environment variables and entrypoint scripts.
   • The security considerations include dependency management, secure environment variable handling, the principle of least privilege, secure file permissions, secure entrypoint scripts, and static file handling.

2. Dockerfile.django-alpine:

   • The Dockerfile uses an Alpine Linux-based base image and installs the necessary dependencies for the Django application.
   • It creates a custom user and group for running the application, which is a good security practice.
   • The security considerations include user isolation, dependency management, review of entrypoint scripts, and secure handling of environment variables.

Code Analysis

We ran 9 analyzers against 2 files and 0 analyzers had findings. 9 analyzers had no findings.

Riskiness

:green_circle: Risk threshold not exceeded.

View PR in the DryRun Dashboard.

[jbraswell]

This looks like a relatively benign change that will make the images compatible with Istio. Any chance this could be merged soon?

[kiblik]

Just 2 questions:

1. Why exactly 4242? Is there some best practice with using UIDs/GIDs? How we can be sure it will not overlap with another tool in the future?
2. Are we sure there will be no impact on existing deployments? E.g. uploaded files stored in media dir has been created with original GID - as UID has higher priority in permission evaluation this might not be the issue but is it possible to check deeper same/similar potential issues?

[mtesauro]

I agree with @kiblik on his points.

While changing the GID or UID may work for you, it's impossible to know if others using DefectDojo have deployments that rely on the currently set UID & GID so I'm not eager to change them without a pretty compelling reason and with some sort of heads up/warning to the current user base so we don't provide bad "surprises" to them the next time they upgrade DefectDojo.

You do have the dockerfiles and everything needed to adjust the GID for your specific needs which is one of the great parts of Open Source. Yes, you'd end up running a slightly custom install of DefectDojo but building and storing your own container images is not a bad thing nor an excessive burden.

[AdamJoelNichols]

@kiblik

1. 4242 is somewhat arbitrary - though I suppose readers of Hitchhiker's Guide may disagree. The main reason for the change is that the current GID, 1337 ("leet") is somewhat less arbitrary and therefore more prone to collision. I'm open to whatever number you all think is best, this PR is mainly a suggestion to not use 1337.
2. I cannot be sure. @mtesauro is correct. We are currently making use of DD as a custom install - and happy to have the option. In some major upgrade though, I would ask you to consider moving away from 1337, again, as this number is more prone to collision due to its imbued meaning.

[Maffooch]

@AdamJoelNichols thank you for bringing this to our attention! In the Q4 community update, we are prioritizing the structure and simplicity of the docker files. We will keep your suggestions in mind when doing that work 😄