In troubleshooting connectivity issues, our network team lacks the rights on our servers (Windows and RHEL) to connect and test connectivity (for example, when tweaking a firewall rule, a ticket bounces back and forth as they modify something, then we test, then they tweak it, then we test again, etc.), which extends troubleshooting pretty significantly. Is there a way I can allow them to run these tools from the servers in question with minimal security risk?

I know they could do this if I had TELNET or SSH enabled and they could get command line access, but I'd prefer not to open that large a gap. Is there a small "basic network tools" package I could install on my servers that's accessible via a web interface or TELNET? Just something that gives them to option to PING from that server, test connectivity over ports to other locations, etc.

If there are other solutions or I'm missing something obvious, please let me know.

  • Knowing the OS(es) of your servers would help a lot. – mfinni Jul 22 '14 at 15:03
  • @mfinni I've updated the question - it's mostly Windows 2008/2012 and Red Hat Enterprise Linux. – SqlRyan Jul 22 '14 at 15:10
  • 1
    Set up an unprivileged account on the box. That'll do the trick. It's only packet sniffing you need root/admin for. – Sobrique Jul 22 '14 at 15:10

It really depends on how much you trust them.

Option 1 - Keep doing it yourself

If you don't trust them at all, don't give them any access...though really, they control your firewall, so you must trust them at least somewhat. Still, nothing else will be as secure as giving them no access as all.

Option 2 - Give them a very limited account

If you trust them not to do anything malicious (but don't trust them not to do anything STUPID), give them a chrooted shell that has ping and traceroute copied to it, which they can SSH into and run tests. Depending on how well you set that up, it can be anywhere from swiss cheeze to fairly secure. But even if that's not impenetrable, it stops them from accidentally doing any harm. (I'm assuming linux here since you mentioned SSH...windows don't have a very good equivalent as far as I know).

This is fairly easy to setup, but requires the network team to login and run the commands themselves.

Option 3 - Web based traceroute

Since you mentioned that having them login to the server might have social/political problems, another option might be to setup a very simple website (or folder on an existing website if these are webservers) that has a page that will run traceroute and ping (and nothing else). Something like http://tracert.com/, but run from your own server. You could restrict it to a certain range of source IP addresses or require a username/password to get to the page if required.

If you go for that method, you may find some useful existing scripts by searching for something like "web based traceroute php", or you could write your own as long as you are careful about properly escaping the user input.

This will be simplest and fastest for them to use, and gives them very little more access than what they already have by being in control of the network.

You could even get it ready for them ahead of time - if you wanted to allow outbound traffic from your server example.com to, you could send them a ticket like:

Please change the firewall to allow us to connect to Can you please check that it works by clicking this link and checking that we can ping it? http://example.com/networktools/ping.php?ip=

Depending on the level of trust, you could also include tools like nmap so they can verify ports are accessible.

  • Thanks for the detail - it's a mix of Windows and Linux. I do trust them with basic access and that's less of an issue than the perceived "you're asking us to do your job for you and we won't" response I'd expect to get if I just give them shell access directly the server. They'd prefer not to ever connect to our servers and to leave verification up to the server admins, but I'm trying to suggest a way that we can shorten troubleshooting time by improving access, but without shifting a perceptible amount of responsibility. – SqlRyan Jul 22 '14 at 15:12
  • @SqlRyan added another option that might be seen as less "doing your job for you" – Grant Jul 22 '14 at 16:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.