Re: [Puppet Users] Best practices for infrastructure

Jakov Sosic
Sat, 24 Aug 2013 21:18:17 -0000

On 08/24/2013 04:13 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:33 AM, Félix Barbeira <fbarbeira@gmail.com
> <mailto:fbarbeira@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Speaking in security terms, could be masterless puppet configuration
>     less secure? I mean, the puppet code is in *all* the clients. On the
>     other hand, the puppet code is only in the master, which I think is
>     more secure (you can isolate it on a restricted VLAN, private
>     network, etc). If the security of one client is vulnerated the
>     hacker gets nothing, otherwise he would be able to read the whole
>     puppet code.
>
>
> The difference is minimal. The master will happily serve any config to
> any host. The puppet server relies on the self-reported hostname, so a
> compromised host can go "fishing" for configurations.

Only if you use autosign option. After the certificate is signed, agents
report certname and not hostname. In that regard, puppet master is safer
option, but also less scalable.