[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#717297: marked as done (lightdm: pam.d/lightdm-greeter doesn't use system settings for pam)

Your message dated Tue, 28 Aug 2018 10:05:45 +0200
with message-id <b7abaf8c8e2663523778a9b1ed1f7797be03f2d6.camel@debian.org>
and subject line Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Bug#717297: Bug#717297: Bug#717297: lightdm: pam.d/lightdm-greeter doesn't use system settings for pam
has caused the Debian Bug report #717297,
regarding lightdm: pam.d/lightdm-greeter doesn't use system settings for pam
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
717297: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717297
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: lightdm
Version: 1.6.0-3
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,
We're running in an environment that authenticates via ldap, using sssd
locally.  But pam.d/lightdm-greeter doesn't use common-session etc., so
the updates that sssd's installation did to pam.d/common-xxx don't apply.

I think that pam-greeter should use all the appropriate common-xxx files
in pam.d to manage authentication and so on, so that whatever the admin
has set up for authentication is obeyed by lightdm.  As can be seen from
the attached file, I `fixed' it for now by manually adding an appropriate
pam_sssd line.


-- System Information:
Debian Release: jessie/sid
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (990, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.9-1-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_AU.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_AU.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages lightdm depends on:
ii  adduser                                3.113+nmu3
ii  consolekit                             0.4.5-3.1
ii  dbus                                   1.6.12-1
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]                  1.5.50
ii  libc6                                  2.17-7
ii  libgcrypt11                            1.5.2-3
ii  libglib2.0-0                           2.36.3-3
ii  libpam0g                               1.1.3-9
ii  libxcb1                                1.9.1-3
ii  libxdmcp6                              1:1.1.1-1
ii  lightdm-gtk-greeter [lightdm-greeter]  1.6.0-1

Versions of packages lightdm recommends:
ii  xserver-xorg  1:7.7+3

Versions of packages lightdm suggests:
ii  accountsservice  0.6.34-1
ii  upower           0.9.20-2

-- Configuration Files:
/etc/lightdm/lightdm.conf changed:
[LightDM]
[SeatDefaults]
xserver-allow-tcp=false
greeter-session=lightdm-greeter
greeter-hide-users=true
user-session=xfce
session-wrapper=/etc/X11/Xsession
[XDMCPServer]
[VNCServer]

/etc/pam.d/lightdm-greeter changed:
auth      required pam_env.so envfile=/etc/default/locale
auth      required pam_permit.so
account   required pam_permit.so
password  required pam_deny.so
session   required pam_unix.so
session	  optional pam_sssd.so


-- debconf information:
  lightdm/daemon_name: /usr/sbin/lightdm
* shared/default-x-display-manager: lightdm

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 09:00 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> > I'm pretty puzzled by this. Can you exactly describe what happens,
> > starting from when the greeter starts, and provide some logs?
> > 
> > As I already wrote, my feeling was that /etc/pam.d/lightdm-greeter was
> > *not* used for user authentication, so it should even matter in your
> > case.
> > 
> 
> Any news on this?

Without news in more than four years, I guess we can close the bug.

Regards,
- -- 
Yves-Alexis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEE8vi34Qgfo83x35gF3rYcyPpXRFsFAluFAlkACgkQ3rYcyPpX
RFvb6wgAgnLw00w0m8vuij+Hn9QL43Atoyf/oGQexA7ah4AcCd2qWng54ma1dtFX
V+qQDWKMmZ58Wv1uWd5HcX3iowBpzbipgVpUHm15xQLup+w7z8zX4+6M2WMTs9I+
y1T8V2p02NbuGdP6KIr+hWhz2HyW+UvZXeZVlbiOJx2yWXtwvVgL9xtKMqXT1jUY
wjjWB7/gKB3nQMnGRbKF+z9xHEmJO30PJb4Tki0uAL9M92g4TJSHq+1BZtRjU/5c
ZakNgnIz/IIwuffFpmHu0zbka12XbsTnp0AWUHqg55XjWVSCVfaj/E34SFl2tzUK
2RQuECg6MzUdXRg6InGFA0m1RErZzQ==
=5XS4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- End Message ---
Reply to: