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

Re: Authentication fun

Bryan Stansell bryan@conserver.com
Mon, 5 Mar 2001 02:40:46 -0800 (PST)

I just did a couple tests with RedHat 7.0 (and I believe 6.2 behaved
the same) and have these conclusions.  First, shadow passwords work
fine.  The password can be a standard DES-style or the MD5-style (the
crypt() function works magic based on the salt passed in).  The
password (either type) can be in the shadow file itself (using
"*passwd*" in the conserver.passwd file) or directly in the
conserver.passwd file.

No PAM support is in the code right now.  It's something I'd love to
see added.  Anything using PAM bits probably won't work...unless the
standard getpwnam() and crypt() functions magically call the
appropriate PAM routines.

All my testing was done with conserver-7.0.0...if you're having trouble
with shadow passwords and you're using pre-7.0.0 code, upgrading may be
the trick...or careful editing of the conserver/port.h file (look for

Hope this helps.  If you're still running into trouble, yell.


On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 02:29:12PM -0500, Ernie Oporto wrote:
> I see the same thing on RedHat 6.1.  Only the hash will work, not shadow
> passwords.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: users-admin@conserver.com [mailto:users-admin@conserver.com]On
> > Behalf Of Aaron Burt
> > Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 9:54 PM
> > To: Conserver-Users
> > Subject: Re: Authentication fun
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, alfcab wrote:
> > > Aaron Burt <aaron@osdlab.org> wrote:
> > >>Does Conserver support shadow passwords or PAM?  I'm having a heckuva
> > >>time making either work, but if I copy the hash into conserver.passwd,
> > >>it works fine.
> > >
> > > which os are you using ?
> >
> > Sorry.  Debian Woody, Linux kernel 2.4.1-ac7.
> >