lists at kittypee.com
Tue Apr 9 14:53:00 MDT 2013
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:34 AM, S. Dale Morrey <sdalemorrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> However if something is actively interfering with a well known service from
> doing it's thing, and doing so silently, then it's worse than useless.
> I trust binaries that have been installed by RPM with a keycheck. I make
> the assumption that the software developers know more about what their
> software needs than I do and I trust the package maintainers to only sign
> off on stuff that won't break my system or steal my stuff. (I know big
> assumption and yes I know there have been repo compromises in the past)
It didn't fail silently.
"(13)Permission denied: make_sock: could not bind to address [::]:8081"
This is your clue that the problem is security related.
Your next thought should be, what security measures could block
sockets binding to a TCP port?
* is 8081 a privileged port that requires root? No.
* Is there an extra security layer running (selinux,apparmor)? Yes.
* Are there any entries in the audit log about said permission denied
* Google "selinux http port"? Yes.
Yes it's an extra step, but the benefits do outweigh the drawbacks.
Just remember that it exists and to check the audit log.
More information about the PLUG