Re: Security warnings from pam_securetty?
On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 08:55, Svante Signell wrote:
> Is the bug #243698 in libpam0g really resolved in version 0.76-20? I
> still get the security warnings in my logfiles. What is referred to in
> the changelog.Debian for the null password check: passwd, shadow etc?
> How are these related to the /etc/pam.d/* files. Eg. the
> /etc/pam.d/common-password has the following entry enabled:
> password required pam_unix.so nullok obscure min=4 max=8 md5
> An alternate solution is in the same file. Is this solution to prefer?
> # password required pam_cracklib.so retry=3 minlen=6 difok=3
> # password required pam_unix.so use_authtok nullok md5
> If possible, please explain or if possible give a HOWTO- or an FAQ-
> pointer that describes the current pam behaviour.
> changelog.Debian entry below:
> pam (0.76-20) unstable; urgency=medium
> * Update to patch 55 to only check securetty when we are sure the
> password is null, Closes: #243698
> * Medium urgency because the version now in testing has confusing and
> verbose log messages.
> * Include pam_getenv script which hopefully will be used by some
> people somewhere for some purpose
> -- Sam Hartman <email@example.com> Wed, 28 Apr 2004 22:51:18 -0400
> Please Cc: me since I'm not subscribed to debian-user
> On Tue, 2004-04-20 at 15:27, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 08:57:13PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote:
> > > I find these messages in my logfiles. What has changed recently?
> > > The access to the tty devices is crw-rw---- and owned by root.tty.
> > >
> > > sshd: (pam_securetty) access denied: tty 'ssh' is not secure !
> > > xscreensaver: (pam_securetty) access denied: tty ':0.0' is not secure !
> > This is a filed bug against pam.