bug#22175: /etc/environment not honored by lshd

bug#22175: /etc/environment not honored by lshd

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello!

Somehow /etc/environment isn’t honored when logging in via SSH to an
lshd server running on GuixSD, despite the fact that /etc/pam.d/lshd has
this:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
account required pam_unix.so 
auth required pam_unix.so 
password required pam_unix.so sha512 shadow
session required pam_env.so 
session required pam_unix.so 
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Ludo’.

Re: /etc/environment not honored by lshd

[Niels Möller]

ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Somehow /etc/environment isn’t honored when logging in via SSH to an
> lshd server running on GuixSD, despite the fact that /etc/pam.d/lshd has
> this:

lshd does *not* do the PAM session things (it can use pam for checking
passwords, but only for that). And I'm afraid it's not reasonable to add
support for it in lsh-2.x. Sorry about that.

Old discussion here:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/10/msg01417.html

I have softened a bit since ;-). I think proper PAM support is feature
that fits well in the reorganized lsh-3 userauth, and that I guess lot
of users nned. But not yet implemented there either.

Regards,
/Niels

-- 
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.
_______________________________________________
lsh-bugs mailing list
lsh-bugs@lists.lysator.liu.se
http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/lsh-bugs

Re: /etc/environment not honored by lshd

[Ludovic Courtès]

nisse@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) skribis:

> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Somehow /etc/environment isn’t honored when logging in via SSH to an
>> lshd server running on GuixSD, despite the fact that /etc/pam.d/lshd has
>> this:
>
> lshd does *not* do the PAM session things (it can use pam for checking
> passwords, but only for that). And I'm afraid it's not reasonable to add
> support for it in lsh-2.x. Sorry about that.

I guess we’ll have to find a workaround, not sure what.

> Old discussion here:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2000/10/msg01417.html
>
> I have softened a bit since ;-).

Heheh.  :-)

> I think proper PAM support is feature that fits well in the
> reorganized lsh-3 userauth, and that I guess lot of users nned. But
> not yet implemented there either.

Now you have an incentive?  ;-)

Thanks for your feedback,
Ludo’.
_______________________________________________
lsh-bugs mailing list
lsh-bugs@lists.lysator.liu.se
http://lists.lysator.liu.se/mailman/listinfo/lsh-bugs