I agree don't use xhost!! I found a similar problem where I had SSH
working well, but I could never get an X app to come up on the local
screen. After a friend and where playing around with the problem we
found that some how the localhost entry in the hosts file was gone.
After replacing it the X tunneling work as expected.


On Thu, 2006-04-20 at 10:10 -0600, Mark Senior wrote:
> No, don't use xhost +
> 
> The entire point of using ssh for X11 forwarding is that the ssh
> connection comes from a local process - you don't have to accept
> outside X11 connections.
> 
> xhost + is used specifically for accepting X11 connections that
> _don't_ come from a local process (e.g not over your SSH session).  If
> for some reason the X11 connections are failing to be forwarded over
> the SSH tunnel, xhost + will fix X11 functionally, but it will do it
> by bypassing the entire SSH tunnel.
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> On 4/18/06, Jason Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Nader,
> >
> > on the host you're ssh'ing from try issuing "xhost +" prior to ssh'ing, eg:
> >
> > yourdesktop # xhost +
> > yourdesktop # ssh -X [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > Nader Amadeu wrote:
> >
> > >Hi all, I've googled for more than a week trying to
> > >fix this SSH X11 tuneling problem.
> > >I appreciate some help and thank you in advance.
> > >
> > >I have a remote Solaris 9 with the following options in 
> > >/etc/ssh/sshd_config:
> > >X11Forwarding yes
> > >X11DisplayOffset 10
> > >ForwardX11Trusted yes
> > >
> > >Then I ssh it from my local desktop: (only most important lines here)
> > >
> > >[localdesktop]% ssh -vvv -XY [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >OpenSSH_4.2p1 FreeBSD-20050903, OpenSSL 0.9.7e-p1 25 Oct 2004
> > >debug1: Reading configuration data /etc/ssh/ssh_config
> > >debug2: ssh_connect: needpriv 0
> > >debug1: Connecting to remoteserver [ip.address.here] port 22.
> > >debug1: Connection established.
> > >debug1: Remote protocol version 1.99, remote software version OpenSSH_4.2
> > >debug1: match: OpenSSH_4.2 pat OpenSSH*
> > >debug1: Enabling compatibility mode for protocol 2.0
> > >debug1: Local version string SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_4.2p1 FreeBSD-20050903
> > >debug2: fd 3 setting O_NONBLOCK
> > >debug1: Authentication succeeded (publickey).
> > >debug1: channel 0: new [client-session]
> > >debug3: ssh_session2_open: channel_new: 0
> > >debug2: channel 0: send open
> > >debug1: Entering interactive session.
> > >debug2: callback start
> > >debug2: x11_get_proto: /usr/X11R6/bin/xauth  list :0.0 . 2>/dev/null
> > >debug1: Requesting X11 forwarding with authentication spoofing.
> > >debug2: channel 0: request x11-req confirm 0
> > >debug2: client_session2_setup: id 0
> > >debug2: channel 0: request pty-req confirm 0
> > >debug2: channel 0: request shell confirm 0
> > >debug2: fd 3 setting TCP_NODELAY
> > >debug2: callback done
> > >debug2: channel 0: open confirm rwindow 0 rmax 32768
> > >debug2: channel 0: rcvd adjust 131072
> > >
> > >Now in the remoteserver:
> > >
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] % echo $DISPLAY
> > >       DISPLAY: Undefined variable
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] % netstat -a
> > >       remoteserver.ssh        localdesktop.51899 66608     47 66608      
> > > 0 ESTABLISHED
> > >
> > >Even if i setenv DISPLAY to localhost:10, 11, 12 ... it does not work.
> > >And from this netstat output I cannot find the X11 tuneling channel.
> > >In another attempt below I have the following different debug messages:
> > >
> > >
> > >[localdesktop]% ssh -vvv -o "ForwardX11Trusted no" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >debug2: x11_get_proto: /usr/X11R6/bin/xauth -f 
> > >/tmp/ssh-9xszkw26hB/xauthfile generate :0.0 MIT-MAGIC-COOKIE-1 untrusted 
> > >timeout 1200 2>/dev/null
> > >debug2: x11_get_proto: /usr/X11R6/bin/xauth -f 
> > >/tmp/ssh-9xszkw26hB/xauthfile list :0.0 . 2>/dev/null
> > >debug1: Requesting X11 forwarding with authentication spoofing.
> > >debug2: channel 0: request x11-req confirm 0
> > >
> > >
> > >and again DISPLAY is an undefined variable.
> > >Could anyone help me to get this X11 tunelling work?
> > >Thanks all very much,
> > >nader
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >

Reply via email to