[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E57263C.7040308@canonical.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 14:51:08 +1000
From: Robert Ancell <robert.ancell@...onical.com>
To: Sebastian Krahmer <krahmer@...e.de>
CC: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com,
Guido Berhoerster <gber@...nsuse.org>
Subject: Re: lightdm issues
On 25/08/11 00:08, Sebastian Krahmer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> lightdm (0.9.2) which aims to be a xdm replacement seems to
> fall into the same pitfalls like kdm and gdm recently. There is
> a lot of uid 0 code creating and chown()ing files in user dirs such as
> for ~/.dmrc and ~/.Xauthority. Probably more, depending on
> how the permissions of cache and log directories are set up. For example
> process_start() also creates and chown()s logfiles on users behalf.
>
> There is also one thing that I dont understand about the lightdm
> user itself and why pam sessions seem to be started for it inside
> the greeter session code.
>
> The xdmcp code seems to be OK so far, after a quick review.
>
> l8er,
> -s
>
>
Hi Sebastian,
Thanks for doing this review, this issue is now being tracked in the
LightDM issue tracker:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/lightdm/+bug/834079
Not sure what you mean in your question about the PAM sessions. The
greeter object inside the daemon creates PAMSession objects which
attempt to be authenticated, then passes the successful one to the
session code which starts the PAM session. Might just be bad naming
causing confusion? (I've been meaning to split this into
PAMAuthentication and PAMSession objects).
--Robert
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
