- ghost-smtp-mailgun-setup: two-system email config (newsletter API + transactional SMTP) - firewalld-fleet-hardening: Fedora fleet firewall audit-and-harden pattern with Ansible - clamav-fleet-deployment: fleet deployment with nice/ionice throttling + quarantine - ansible-check-mode-false-positives: when: not ansible_check_mode guard for verify/assert tasks - ghost-emailanalytics-lag-warning: submitted status, lag counter, fetchMissing skip explained
4.5 KiB
title, domain, category, tags, status, created, updated
| title | domain | category | tags | status | created | updated | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ansible Check Mode False Positives in Verify/Assert Tasks | selfhosting | troubleshooting |
|
published | 2026-04-18 | 2026-04-18T11:13 |
Ansible Check Mode False Positives in Verify/Assert Tasks
The Problem
ansible-playbook --check (dry-run mode) reports failures on verify and assert tasks that depend on handler-triggered side effects — even when the playbook is correct and would succeed on a real run.
Symptom: Running --check produces errors like:
TASK [Assert hardened settings are active] ***
fatal: [host]: FAILED! => {
"assertion": "'permitrootlogin without-password' in sshd_effective.stdout",
"msg": "One or more SSH hardening settings not effective"
}
But a real run (ansible-playbook without --check) succeeds cleanly.
Why It Happens
In check mode, Ansible simulates tasks but does not execute handlers. This means:
- A config file task reports
changed(it would deploy the file) - The handler (
reload sshd,reload firewalld, etc.) is never fired - A subsequent verify task runs
sshd -Torufw status verboseagainst the current live state (pre-change) - The assert compares the current state against the expected post-change state and fails
The verify task is reading reality accurately — the change hasn't happened yet — but the failure is misleading. It suggests the playbook is broken when it's actually correct.
The Fix
Guard verify and assert tasks that depend on handler side effects with when: not ansible_check_mode:
- name: Verify effective SSH settings post-reload
ansible.builtin.command:
cmd: sshd -T
register: sshd_effective
changed_when: false
when: not ansible_check_mode # sshd hasn't reloaded in check mode
- name: Assert hardened settings are active
ansible.builtin.assert:
that:
- "'permitrootlogin without-password' in sshd_effective.stdout"
- "'x11forwarding no' in sshd_effective.stdout"
fail_msg: "SSH hardening settings not effective — check for conflicting config"
when: not ansible_check_mode # result would be pre-change state
This skips the verify/assert during check mode (where they'd produce false failures) while keeping them active on real runs (where they catch actual misconfigurations).
When to Apply This Guard
Apply when: not ansible_check_mode to any task that:
- Reads the active/effective state of a service after a config change (
sshd -T,ufw status verbose,firewall-cmd --list-all,nginx -T) - Asserts that the post-change state matches expectations
- Depends on a handler having fired first (service reload, daemon restart)
Don't apply it to tasks that check pre-existing state (e.g., verifying a file exists before modifying it) — those are valid in check mode.
Common Patterns
SSH daemon verify
- name: Verify effective sshd settings
ansible.builtin.command: sshd -T
register: sshd_out
changed_when: false
when: not ansible_check_mode
- name: Assert sshd hardening active
ansible.builtin.assert:
that:
- "'maxauthtries 3' in sshd_out.stdout"
when: not ansible_check_mode
UFW status verify
- name: Show UFW status
ansible.builtin.command: ufw status verbose
register: ufw_status
changed_when: false
when: not ansible_check_mode
- name: Confirm default deny incoming
ansible.builtin.assert:
that:
- "'Default: deny (incoming)' in ufw_status.stdout"
when: not ansible_check_mode
nginx config verify
- name: Test nginx config
ansible.builtin.command: nginx -t
changed_when: false
when: not ansible_check_mode
Trade-off
Guarding with when: not ansible_check_mode means check mode won't validate these assertions. The benefit — no false failures — outweighs the gap because:
- Check mode is showing you what would change, not whether the result is valid
- Real runs still assert and will catch actual misconfigurations
- The alternative (failing check runs) erodes trust in
--checkoutput
If you need to verify the effective post-change state in check mode, consider splitting the playbook into a deploy pass and a separate verify-only playbook run without --check.