commit 04143fd68dbc656905714eff5c208fadb3464e25
Author: Quentin Rameau
AuthorDate: Wed Sep 7 13:02:42 2016 +0200
Commit: Markus Teich
CommitDate: Wed Sep 7 13:10:25 2016 +0200
Unify how we check passwords between different OSes
diff
Quentin Rameau wrote:
> But I understand what you mean, so what do you think about prefixing
> them with the actual function name (and prepending the tool name too of
> course):
> die("slock: getspnam: cannot retrieve shadow entry[…]");
> die("slock: getpwnam_shadow: cannot retrieve shadow
Heyho Quentin,
Quentin Rameau wrote:
> These variables seems to be about the auth_userokay()
So the removal is fine. Thanks for the clarification.
> > > diff --git a/slock.c b/slock.c
> > > …
> > > +#else
> > > + if (rval[0] == '*' && rval[1] == '\0') {
> > > +#ifdef __OpenBSD__
> > > +
Heyho Quentin,
thanks for the update.
Quentin Rameau wrote:
> diff --git a/config.mk b/config.mk
> …
> -# Install mode. On BSD systems MODE=2755 and GROUP=auth
> -# On others MODE=4755 and GROUP=root
> -#MODE=2755
> -#GROUP=auth
There was a patch some time ago making use of those variables. If
> Heyho Quentin,
Hey Markus,
> I think it's a good simplification, but does it still work on the
> other BSDs as well, not just OpenBSD?
Well, yes it does :)
(at least should, testing is welcomed to confirm that, following
documentation it's ok for NetBSD, FreeBSD, DragonFlyBSD)
> The commented
Heyho Quentin,
I think it's a good simplification, but does it still work on the other BSDs as
well, not just OpenBSD? The commented block about BSD in config.mk should be
updated as well with the patch.
--Markus
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 20:52:05 +0200
Quentin Rameau wrote:
>
I second this patch. As a side-note, this patch is necessary and gives
the ground work for a patch by me that drops privileges after the getpw
function.
Previously on OpenBSD, slock would _never_ drop privileges, which