From owner-cvs-all Sat Jan 19 9:49:40 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.139.170]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6226C37B402; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 09:49:28 -0800 (PST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with UUCP id g0JHnOD27467; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 17:49:24 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from grondar.za (mark@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grimreaper.grondar.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g0JHl1t22866; Sat, 19 Jan 2002 17:47:01 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Message-Id: <200201191747.g0JHl1t22866@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: "Andrey A. Chernov" Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: For all who miss it, PAM changes explanation reposted References: <20020119170316.GA11315@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <20020119170316.GA11315@nagual.pp.ru> ; from "Andrey A. Chernov" "Sat, 19 Jan 2002 20:03:16 +0300." Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2002 17:47:01 +0000 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 17:08:55 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > *detailed* explanation of what you think is wrong and why you think > > your patch is correct. You have clearly never read the PAM documentation. Please do so. > Here it is again modulo exact PAM_CRED_ERR code choosing I not insist on: > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > More about pam_opie+pam_unix chain, i.e. how it was broken and is fixed: > > In old variant pam_opie return two states, PAM_SUCCESS and PAM_AUTH_ERR. > > 1) If we chain it as "sufficient" and get failure, it falls to pam_unix > unconditionally, but must do that only when opiefileaccess()+opiealways() > permits. This is dangerous from security sense. > > 2) If we chain it as "required" and get success, we'll get failure in the > next pam_unix in the chain due to wrong password. > > 3) If we chain it as "requsite" and get failure, it stop whole chain > unconditionally, but must fallback to pam_unix when > opiefileaccess()+opiealways() permits. > > 4) If we chain it as "optional", ther is no sense to keep it since > non-optional pam_unix is already in the chain. > > All it means that there must be 3-state machine for pam_opie: PAM_SUCCESS, > PAM_AUTH_ERR and some 3rd, PAM_CRED_ERR. > In that case we can do 1) for PAM_SUCCESS and PAM_AUTH_ERR and disable > fallback to pam_unix for PAM_CRED_ERR case. > > > -- > Andrey A. Chernov > http://ache.pp.ru/ > > -- > Andrey A. Chernov > http://ache.pp.ru/ -- o Mark Murray \_ FreeBSD Services Limited O.\_ Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message