Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:51:35 +0400 (MSD) From: "Ilmar S. Habibulin" <ilmar@ints.ru> To: <security@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: that's for sshd Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103312247020.89415-200000@ws-ilmar.ints.ru> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103312205530.89026-200000@ws-ilmar.ints.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
to make my previous patch happy, because auth-pam.c didn't set pam
hostname. :( Strange.
What guys do you think of proposed changes? They are not complite, just
samples of my thoughts. So don't be too critical, please.
[-- Attachment #2 --]
--- auth-pam.c.orig Sat Mar 31 22:45:59 2001
+++ auth-pam.c Sat Mar 31 22:43:01 2001
@@ -195,6 +195,14 @@
{
int pam_retval;
+ debug("PAM setting rhost to \"%.200s\"", get_canonical_hostname());
+ pam_retval = pam_set_item(pamh, PAM_RHOST,
+ get_canonical_hostname());
+ if (pam_retval != PAM_SUCCESS) {
+ fatal("PAM set rhost failed[%d]: %.200s",
+ pam_retval, PAM_STRERROR(pamh, pam_retval));
+ }
+
if (remote_user != NULL) {
debug("PAM setting ruser to \"%.200s\"", remote_user);
pam_retval = pam_set_item(pamh, PAM_RUSER, remote_user);
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.33.0103312247020.89415-200000>