[SM-Sorcery] Re: [SM-Discuss] Re: [Bug 2129] openssh should create ssh user
adamsgl at dhbit.ca
Fri Jan 24 14:31:34 EST 2003
Is this something that needs to be part of the ISO/installer, or is this
something sorcery will take care of on it's own?
On 24 Jan 2003 10:03:59 -0500
Dufflebunk <dufflebunk at dufflebunk.homeip.net> wrote:
> This was fixed last night (hmm did I remember to close the bug?). The
> fix is to comment out line 41 of libgrimoire and add the line
> 'nogroup:65534:' to /etc/sorcery/groups.
> On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 04:56, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> > Sorcery team, please, could you modify /etc/sorcery/accounts and
> > /etc/sorcery/groups according to
> > http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2129#c3
> > I installed latest iso http://download.sourcemage.org/iso/ :
> > /etc/sorcery/accounts contains sshd:111:65534
> > /etc/group contains nogroup with 65534
> > /etc/sorcery/groups contains sudo:111:
> > My suggestion:
> > /etc/sorcery/accounts could contains sshd:111:111
> > /etc/sorcery/groups could be modified, I would added group sshd:111:
> > and modify group sudo:111: to for example sudo:114:
> > Why does sshd use nogroup? I think sshd could have its own group sshd.
> > Or modify create_account function to ignore nogroup in /etc/passwd.
> > Please.
> > --
> > Ladislav Hagara, Crypto Section Maintainer
> > -
> > > Thought I'd get some input from everyone on how to handle this bug.
> > > The problem is with the create_user function in the openssh spell. The
> > > spell attempts to create the user/group sshd, it checks the
> > > /etc/sorcery/accounts file and determines that the user sshd should
> > > have id=111 and group=65534. The /etc/sorcery/groups file does not
> > > list an sshd group. The create_user function first tries to create a
> > > group called sshd with id=65534 (why does it do this?), this fails
> > > because the group'nogroup' already exists with this id. Then it tries
> > > to create the user sshd with group='sshd', since creating the group
> > > failed, creating the user using the group name also fails.
> > >
> > > I'm not exactly sure how this is suppose to function. Should sorcery
> > > be creating the group if there is no entry in /etc/sorcery/groups? If
> > > so, then does it always assume the groupname=username? If sorcery
> > > shouldn't create the group, then the create_user function should use
> > > the numeric group id specified in /etc/sorcery/accounts rather than
> > > the user name for the group. I'm guessing the ideal solution is to
> > > just add an sshd group to/etc/sorcery/groups (the group id number will
> > > also need to be changed in/etc/sorcery/accounts).
> > >
> > > For more info:
> > > http://bugs.sourcemage.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2129
> > >
> > > -casey
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > SM-Discuss mailing list
> > > SM-Discuss at lists.ibiblio.org
> > > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> > _______________________________________________
> > SM-Sorcery mailing list
> > SM-Sorcery at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-sorcery
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss at lists.ibiblio.org
Adam Clark, Chat Section Maintainer, ISO Forger
Grimoire Gurus Cardholding Member
a.k.a. Kinetix on #sourcemage, #grimoire-gurus
Come see http://dhbit.ca for all your tech humour needs!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/sm-discuss/attachments/20030124/9d2affa7/attachment.bin
More information about the SM-Discuss