[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: PAM support? (Was: [sysvinit] Re: ?New sysvinit version 2.89dsf?)

From: Dr. Werner Fink
Subject: Re: PAM support? (Was: [sysvinit] Re: ?New sysvinit version 2.89dsf?)
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:51:07 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 06:44:12PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Dr. Werner Fink]
> > Currently I've a few open points for PAM support ...
> > 
> >  Which processes should be enabled to use PAM?
> >    IMHO we may skip `+' with their own utmp/wtmp housekeeping
> >    Also the support could be used for system initial boot
> >    and runlevel changes together with the sulogin respawn entry
> I have not investigated this PAM patch, but my initial thought would
> be to use pam only for the sysvinit stuff that need to ask for a user
> password (single user), to make sure any pam authentication method
> will work to get root access in an emergency.

I've found on that for
only a potential PAM session on the tty line is closed,
nothing more and nothing less.  The file
does not use PAM at all. And indeed I've found that the
sulogin remains without PAM as any error within /etc/pam.d/
configuration would make it impossible for root to logon
in an emergency case to fix e.g. the PAM configuration.


  "Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having
          a peeing section in a swimming pool." -- Edward Burr

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]