Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/05/2012 06:53 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/05/2012 04:18 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/05/2012 03:00 PM, Rob Crittenden wrote:
Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 06/05/2012 10:06 AM, Martin Kosek wrote:
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 11:51 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 17:22 +0200, Petr Viktorin wrote:
An update plugin needed root privileges, and aborted the update
if an
ordinary user user ran it.
With this patch the plugin is skipped with a warning in that case.

Hi Petr,
I am not sure I like the proposed solution.

If there is a legitimate reason to run this plugin as non-root (eg
user) then you should change the connection part to try to use
auth over ldap when non-root, not just throw a warning.

If there is no reason for anyone but root to run this script
then we
should just abort if not root IMO.


I would keep this script runable for root users only. Regularly,
should not be run manually but as a part of RPM update which is
done by
root. It is being run manually only when something is broken anyway
I am not convinced that non-root users should be involved in such


Thanks for the advice. The attached patch only allows root to run

NACK. It is very handy for developers to be able to run
to test update files.


Developers can run it as root, I don't see a problem here.

I'd really rather not. This does nothing requiring root permissions,
it's all done over LDAP. I'd rather trade not running some plugins than
always requiring root.


Thanks for info on how the tool is used. I looked into it deeper.
The proper fix would be to use the ldap2 backend here, instead of the
IPAdmin. That's ticket 2660, and it'll be quite a lot of work to get
ReplicationManager and tools that depend on that ported.

But, I think it makes sense to require root if (and only if) plugins are
run. Justification below. Would that work for your use case?

There are currently three modes ipa-ldap-updater can run in:
1) --upgrade (needs root, runs plugins)
2) no --upgrade, either no files specified or --plugins (doesn't need
root, runs plugins)
3) no --upgrade, specific files specified without --plugins (doesn't
need root, doesn't run plugins)

I propose to make mode 2 require root.

There are two major uses of the script: install/upgrade (first two
modes), and a developer testing update files (third or possibly second
mode). Install/upgrade is always run as root, and the developer usually
doesn't need to run the plugins (if they do, they should run as root
anyway, so that some (parts of) plugins aren't skipped).

Some of the plugins ask to restart the DS. Without root privileges, the
restart (but not the rest of the plugin) is skipped. I think this is
just asking for trouble.
Some plugins (or parts of plugins) don't need root, but I don't think
singling these out and testing both cases is worth the effort.

The attached patch that implements the above. I re-ordered the code a
bit to put the checks before the DM password prompt, so you don't enter
the password only to find out you had to use sudo or different options.

I'll try to live with not being able to run plugins as non-root. If it turns out to be very painful to develop w/o it I'll open a new ticket.

ACK, pushed to master.


Freeipa-devel mailing list

Reply via email to