On Nov 17, 2009, at 5:59 AM, Dave McCaldon wrote:
>> 
>> LOGIN_FAILED is very generic. The userauth_publickey function uses
>> a very specific PUBLICKEY_UNVERIFIED return code for the same SSH
>> layer error. I think that either the now suggested LOGIN_FAILED
>> should be renamed to PASSWORD_NOT_ACCEPTED or similar, or both of
>> these error branches should just return one and the same
>> LIBSSH2_ERROR_ to the application - after all it is the same error
>> code in the SSH protocol, and the application knows which function
>> it just called. I don't see a big benefit with dividing the error
>> code inside libssh2?
> 
> I chose LIBSSH2_ERROR_LOGIN_FAILED for two reasons:
> 
>       1) As you point out, userath_publickey already returns a fairly 
> specific error
>       2) The login failure could be caused by either a bad password, and/or 
> invalid username
> 
> I can resubmit the patch introducing LIBSSH2_ERROR_AUTHORIZATION_FAILED as an 
> alias for LIBSSH2_ERROR_PUBLICKEY_UNVERIFIED (-19) and have both functions 
> now return this value (preserving backward compatibility with current code), 
> although this presumably would alter the description for -19 to 
> "Authorization failed".

Before I re-submit a patch for this, I wanted to make sure that there were no 
objections to the error codes or names.

Thanks!


_______________________________________________
libssh2-devel http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libssh2-devel

Reply via email to