From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep  3 14:15:26 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5F964E;
 Tue,  3 Sep 2013 14:15:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from smtp.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B3062F9A;
 Tue,  3 Sep 2013 14:15:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from nine.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102])
 by smtp-int.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DCF14671;
 Tue,  3 Sep 2013 14:15:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by nine.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
 id 6466D33A2F; Tue,  3 Sep 2013 16:15:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: OpenSSH, PAM and kerberos
References: <86sixrwdcv.fsf@nine.des.no> <20130830131455.GW3796@zxy.spb.ru>
 <8661uj9lc6.fsf@nine.des.no> <20130902181754.GD3796@zxy.spb.ru>
 <867geywdfc.fsf@nine.des.no> <20130903083301.GF3796@zxy.spb.ru>
 <86y57euu8y.fsf@nine.des.no> <20130903093756.GG3796@zxy.spb.ru>
 <86ppsqutw7.fsf@nine.des.no>
 <998724759.20130903142637@serebryakov.spb.ru>
 <20130903103922.GI3796@zxy.spb.ru>
 <6110257289.20130903145034@serebryakov.spb.ru>
 <86d2oquopo.fsf@nine.des.no>
 <226539732.20130903154908@serebryakov.spb.ru>
 <8661uiujin.fsf@nine.des.no>
 <1734535072.20130903174359@serebryakov.spb.ru>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 16:15:26 +0200
In-Reply-To: <1734535072.20130903174359@serebryakov.spb.ru> (Lev Serebryakov's
 message of "Tue, 3 Sep 2013 17:43:59 +0400")
Message-ID: <86vc2it2ip.fsf@nine.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.org, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]"
 <freebsd-security.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-security>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-security@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-security-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:15:26 -0000

Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> login(1) works. It means, that console and telnet works. ftpd(8) doesn't
> need such excessive session support (single login via ftp? Are you
> kidding?). So, only sshd(8) is broken. And change (dramatically) well-kno=
wn
> programs (like login(1)) and introduce new subsystem to fix bug (it is
> really a bug) in sshd? I don't think it is sane way to do things.

We're not just talking about a bug in sshd.  We're talking about a
fundamentally broken paradigm which affects *all* applications.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no