Cloudron makes it easy to run web apps like WordPress, Nextcloud, GitLab on your server. Find out more or install now.

SOLVED Backup failing with "copy code: 1, signal: null": "cannot create hard link" "operation not permitted"

  • @girish Is there anything I need to be doing to help you guys out before I need to erase the backups again and start fresh? It's failed a second time now so I suspect this will always be like this until I force clear it again but I don't want to take away anything that'd help you narrow down what the issue is either.

  • Update: The backup was successful just 55 minutes ago, without me needing to do anything this time. Still very interested in getting this resolved though as I'm sure it'll come back at some point again since this is several times this has happened this year now.

  • Staff

    @d19dotca Yeah, we still haven't gotten to the bottom of this 😞 There is definitely some bug since it just manifests sporadically (and we have this from some other people's setups as well).

  • @girish I just wanted to say that I'm still having this issue. It seems to happen very randomly, sometimes it doesn't happen for days or almost a week or more, but then it might happen for two backup attempts in a row. It's very intermittent, but still an issue. Hoping we can get to the bottom of this at some point (considering backups are a pretty critical piece of the solution), but I totally understand this is a rare issue so will likely be hard to nail down. If there's anything I can do for you to help narrow it down, I'd be happy to.

  • @girish This continues to be an issue. Anything I can do to help narrow this one down? It's quite annoying when every couple of days or so or even multiple times on the same day it fails to completely backup. Thankfully it seems all the apps get backed up, it's always doing this when backing up emails, getting stuck on different emails.

  • Staff

    @d19dotca Let me contact you from support@ in a couple of days. Currently, a bit tied with the 5.6 release but I would love to get to the bottom of this.

  • @girish No problem at all, sounds great. Thanks Girish! πŸ™‚

  • @girish Never heard back on this, but I know you guys are super busy too. I'd love to work together to fix this issue though as it's been much more prevalent to me the past few months and I suspect it coincides with email usage increase from my COVID-19 clinics since they're using email insanely often. My email history on the Email tab used to show upwards of sometimes an hour or two in time as there wasn't a ton of activity on it, but now it's maybe 3-5 minutes of activity at any given time, because those clinic emails are constantly being used. I suggest this possible relationship because every time the error occurs it's almost always (if not always) thrown on an email message file. Not always the clinic's email account files, but it just seems like it's become a much more frequent issue since the email use itself has skyrocketed on my server.

  • Staff

    @d19dotca I think we are a bit more free now since 5.6 is out. Are you able to write to and give us ssh access? I would like to take a detailed look at the logs and get to the bottom of this. Thanks!

  • @girish Just provided access and sent the email. πŸ™‚

  • Staff

    What I found so far is that the link operation is denied by the kernel. dmesg has the following lines:

    [563683.439933] audit: type=1702 audit(1601496162.706:33): op=linkat ppid=5039 pid=10646 auid=4294967295 uid=1001 gid=1001 euid=1001 suid=1001 fsuid=1001 egid=1001 sgid=1001 fsgid=1001 tty=(none) ses=4294967295 comm="cp" exe="/bin/cp" res=0
    [563683.439938] audit: type=1302 audit(1601496162.706:34): item=0 name="/path/dovecot-uidlist.lock" inode=2246683 dev=fc:20 mode=0100644 ouid=0 ogid=0 rdev=00:00 nametype=NORMAL cap_fp=0000000000000000 cap_fi=0000000000000000 cap_fe=0 cap_fver=0

    The type= means this from audit.h

    1702 /* Suspicious use of file links */
    1302    /* Filename path information */

    And according to it's triggering for some ANOM_LINK event type. So far, there is little to no information on what all this means.

  • @girish this sounds to me like a resource or policy type exhaustion issue. Like when ulimit it too low or we run out of inodes.

    Is anything else running in the kernel, like SE Linux?

    Are we hitting limits on hardlinks with large enough backups? I believe the limit on ext4 is 65k

    It would be interesting to switch filesystems and see if it happens on xfs for example.

    Do you have an Object Store target option via S3?

  • Staff

    I think the 65k is the number of hardlinks on a file and not the hardlinks on a file system.

    The rabbit hole goes as deep as we want to πŸ™‚

    I think I found the problem though of course I have to try it out. audit_log_path_denied here - is where the audit log is raised. I am no kernel expert but a casual reading of the comment "Allowed if owner and follower match" suggests that the owner of file and the linker is not matching. The symlinking process runs as user yellowtent.

    root@my:/cloudron-backups/snapshot/box/mail# find . -user root -type f

    Bingo! For some reason, these 2 specific files are not owner yellowtent and are root. Looks like some bug/race in the code that creates snapshot. Curiously, both the files above are of 0 size, so maybe that's causing some strange event ordering.

  • Staff

    Yay, found the problem πŸ™‚ Issue is that if a file disappears when we are creating the snapshot, the code errors. Usually files in the snapshot are chowned to the yellowtent user but on an error it ends up creating an empty file in the snapshot directory with the root permission. The hard linking code is run as yellowtent user, and thus symlinking fails. Phew!

  • Yaay! .. and there was much rejoicing! πŸ˜‰

    Nicely done.

    That root owned file would be concerning as a local root escalation. What else there runs as root while yellowtent is doing it's thing?

  • Staff

  • @girish that’s perfect, great detective work! Thanks Girish for working to solve that. I really appreciate it. I’ll keep an eye on it in my server you patched and see if the issue comes back. Thanks again! πŸ™‚

Log in to reply