On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 07:43:14PM +0100, Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 12/11/2014 11:41 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> From 077971dc3d8cefc8df123ed1e1018f06d7679545 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Jakub Hrozek<jhrozek(a)redhat.com>
>Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 11:19:58 +0100
>Subject: [PATCH 3/4] MAN: Misspelled username in pam_trusted_users is not
> fatal
>
>The man page claimed that failing to resolve an user name results in
>failure to start SSSD, but it's not the case and shouldn't be, because
>marking a user as trusted only elevates privileges, so it's safe to
>ignore that failure.
>---
> src/man/sssd.conf.5.xml | 5 -----
> 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/src/man/sssd.conf.5.xml b/src/man/sssd.conf.5.xml
>index
3525d78caff28fd05cc18061d023fec3c50d1a47..2002ccc7caf7013ead5b97c463fba46b734090ae 100644
>--- a/src/man/sssd.conf.5.xml
>+++ b/src/man/sssd.conf.5.xml
>@@ -907,11 +907,6 @@ fallback_homedir =/home/%u
> the PAM responder even in case it is not in the
> pam_trusted_users list.
> </para>
>- <para>
>- Also please note that if there is a user name in
>- pam_trusted_users list which fails to be resolved
>- it will cause that SSSD will not be started.
>- </para>
> </listitem>
> </varlistentry>
> <varlistentry>
>-- 1.9.3
Hello Jakub,
patches LGTM, I have just a little problem with 3rd patch - actually I think
that the man page describes what really happens - this is form my
sss_pam.log:
(Thu Dec 11 18:35:21 2014) [sssd[pam]] [sss_process_init] (0x0400):
Responder Initialization complete
(Thu Dec 11 18:35:21 2014) [sssd[pam]] [sss_user_by_name_or_uid] (0x0040):
[xxxxxxxxx] is neither a valid UID nor a user name which could be resolved
by getpwnam().
(Thu Dec 11 18:35:21 2014) [sssd[pam]] [csv_string_to_uid_array] (0x0040):
List item [xxxxxxxxx] is neither a valid UID nor a user name which could be
resolved by getpwnam().
(Thu Dec 11 18:35:21 2014) [sssd[pam]] [get_trusted_uids] (0x0010): Failed
to set allowed UIDs.
(Thu Dec 11 18:35:21 2014) [sssd[pam]] [pam_process_init] (0x0010):
get_trusted_uids failed: 22:[Invalid argument].
(Thu Dec 11 18:35:21 2014) [sssd[pam]] [sss_responder_ctx_destructor]
(0x0400): Responder is being shut down
Oops, I must test better next time. Attached patch just makes sure that
we document properly what is and what is not checked.