]] Jerome BENOIT
Nevertheless, a less egocentric reading of the PAM policy let me guess that
the priority may be higher but less than 256 (``local authentication'');
for the lower bound, as it makes sense that a ``strong measures'' module
needs a relevant effective TMPDIR, I guess that the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 29/06/13 09:44, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
]] Jerome BENOIT
Nevertheless, a less egocentric reading of the PAM policy let me guess that
the priority may be higher but less than 256 (``local authentication'');
for the lower bound, as it makes
]] Jerome BENOIT
On 29/06/13 09:44, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
]] Jerome BENOIT
Nevertheless, a less egocentric reading of the PAM policy let me guess that
the priority may be higher but less than 256 (``local authentication'');
for the lower bound, as it makes sense that a ``strong
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello,
On 05/06/13 10:06, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
]] Jerome Benoit
the current Priority field in the PAM profile is zero
in such a way that no PAM module can run before pam-tmpdir,
even the ones that paly pwj TMPDIR (as
]] Jerome Benoit
the current Priority field in the PAM profile is zero
in such a way that no PAM module can run before pam-tmpdir,
even the ones that paly pwj TMPDIR (as libpam-ssh not named
one): please can you increase the Priorit of libpam-tmpdir
in such a
Package: libpam-tmpdir
Version: 0.09
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
the current Priority field in the PAM profile is zero
in such a way that no PAM module can run before pam-tmpdir,
even the ones that paly pwj TMPDIR (as libpam-ssh not named
one): please can
6 matches
Mail list logo
