Re: help on a script
Incoming from Oliver Elphick:
> On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 07:38, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> > > > Make the script executable and make sure the user under whose uid it
> > > > will run is able to connect with ssh without supplying a password.
> > >
> > > How exactly would I do that? Make a user that doesn't have to supply a
> > > password? Like the apache default www-data? How would I set up the user?
> >
> > On the target machine
> >
> > mkdir ~/.ssh
> >
> > On the sending machine:
> >
> > ssh-keygen -t dsa
> > (leave the passphrase empty)
> >
> > scp .ssh/id_dsa.pub [other machine]:.ssh
>
> Sorry, that should be:
> scp .ssh/id_dsa.pub [other machine]:/tmp
> ssh [other machine]
> cat /tmp/id_dsa.pub >>.ssh/authorized_keys
So, why is this such a hassle? I did the above for machine#2.
machine#1 has no problem with the same key.
# ------------------------------------------------------
To machine#1: [this one has worked fine for some time.]
(0) keeling /home/keeling_ ssh machine#1
(0) machine#1 keeling /home/users/keeling_
(0) machine#1 keeling /home/users/keeling_ ssh -V
SSH Version 1.2.32 [i586-unknown-linux], protocol version 1.5.
Standard version. Does not use RSAREF.
# ------------------------------------------------------
# ------------------------------------------------------
To machine#2:
(0) keeling /home/keeling_ ssh machine#2
Enter passphrase for key '/home/keeling/.ssh/id_dsa':
Warning: your password will expire in XX days
Linux machine#2 2.4.20 #1 Sat Jan 25 15:38:16 MST 2003 i686 unknown
No mail.
Last login: Sun Jun 6 00:38:21 2004 from pm3-141.blah.ab.ca
(0) machine#2 keeling /home/users/keeling_ ssh -V
OpenSSH_3.4p1 Debian 1:3.4p1-1.woody.3, SSH protocols 1.5/2.0, OpenSSL 0x0090603f
# ------------------------------------------------------
This is not a _huge_ deal; as long as I can get into the thing, great!
However, I would prefer the two worked the same (aka, passwordless).
--
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling
- -
Reply to: