debcrafters-packages team mailing list archive

[Ubuntu SRU Bot <2087827@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

All autopkgtests for the newly accepted pam (1.5.3-7ubuntu2.1) for oracular have finished running.
The following regressions have been reported in tests triggered by the package:

apparmor/unknown (amd64)
at/3.2.5-2.1ubuntu3 (s390x)
courier-authlib/unknown (amd64)
cron/unknown (amd64)
dovecot/1:2.3.21.1+dfsg1-1ubuntu1 (armhf, ppc64el, s390x)
freeradius/3.2.5+dfsg-3ubuntu0.2 (s390x)
inetutils/2:2.5-5ubuntu1 (s390x)
inetutils/unknown (ppc64el)
inn2/unknown (ppc64el)
libcap2/unknown (ppc64el)
libpam-mount/unknown (arm64)
lxc/unknown (arm64)
mariadb/1:11.4.5-0ubuntu0.24.10.1 (armhf, ppc64el, s390x)
mariadb/unknown (arm64)
ngircd/unknown (arm64)
oath-toolkit/unknown (arm64)
openssh/1:9.7p1-7ubuntu4.3 (s390x)
samba/unknown (ppc64el)
shadow/unknown (ppc64el)
slurm-wlm/unknown (s390x)
soju/unknown (s390x)
strongswan/unknown (s390x)
update-motd/unknown (ppc64el)
util-linux/2.40.2-1ubuntu1.1 (ppc64el)
vsftpd/unknown (ppc64el)
zfs-linux/unknown (s390x)


Please visit the excuses page listed below and investigate the failures, proceeding afterwards as per the StableReleaseUpdates policy regarding autopkgtest regressions [1].

https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-
migration/oracular/update_excuses.html#pam

[1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Autopkgtest_Regressions

Thank you!

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
Debcrafters packages, which is subscribed to pam in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2087827

Title:
  Pam includes does not look in /usr/lib/pam.d

Status in pam package in Ubuntu:
  Fix Released
Status in pam source package in Noble:
  Fix Committed
Status in pam source package in Oracular:
  Fix Committed
Status in pam source package in Plucky:
  Fix Committed
Status in pam source package in Questing:
  Fix Released

Bug description:
  [ Impact ]
  The Debian-specific (and fairly heavily used) @include stanza doesn't load anything from /usr/lib/pam.d, preventing moving default configuration from /etc, which is needed for Ubuntu Core.

  [ Test Plan ]

  In a fresh container:

  # adduser foo
  # mv /etc/pam.d/* /usr/lib/pam.d
  # login 

  You should be able to log in as user foo.

  After exiting the foo session, to check cross-folder inclusion:

  # mv /usr/lib/pam.d/common-password /etc/pam.d
  # mv /usr/lib/pam.d/login /etc/pam.d
  # login

  And finally, to check that they load the /etc file in priority:
  # cp /usr/lib/pam.d/common-account /etc/pam.d
  # echo foobar >> /etc/pam.d/common-account
  # login

  That last one should fail with foobar-related errors in the system
  logs.

  [ Where problems could occur ]

  To minimize user setup breakage potential the test plan ensures that
  there wouldn't be any new shadowing of user config file. Any other
  config that includes something only present in /usr/lib would have
  been broken anyway.

  [Original report]
  We're using libpam in the Ubuntu Core rootfs for the core24 snap (which is pam from Noble). We've run into a sitaution where we would like to move pam.d files into /usr/lib/pam.d instead of /etc/pam.d, and looking at man pages this should be supported. (I.e it always checks /etc/pam.d first, then /usr/lib/pam.d).

  However, there seems to be an issue (or misunderstanding) in terms of
  how `include`'s are loaded. For an installation that has all pam.d
  files in /usr/lib we get this error:

  ```
  [  556.375377] sshd[3553]: PAM _pam_load_conf_file: unable to open config for /etc/pam.d/common-auth
  [  556.377644] sshd[3553]: PAM error loading (null)
  [  556.379731] sshd[3553]: PAM _pam_init_handlers: error reading /usr/lib/pam.d/sshd
  [  556.382681] sshd[3553]: PAM _pam_init_handlers: [Critical error - immediate abort]
  [  556.384512] sshd[3553]: PAM error reading PAM configuration file
  [  556.386397] sshd[3553]: PAM pam_start: failed to initialize handlers
  [  556.389716] sshd[3553]: PAM pam_end: NULL pam handle passed
  [  556.393755] sshd[3553]: fatal: PAM: initialisation failed

  ```

  It seems to correctly read sshd from /usr/lib/pam.d/, however the
  includes it seems it insists on loading through /etc/pam.d. Looking at
  the code:
  https://git.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pam/tree/libpam/pam_handlers.c?h=applied/ubuntu/noble#n227
  it seems that it only checks /etc/pam.d, and not /usr/lib/pam.d. This
  seems to not be in line with the man pages?

  *note* this seem at first glance that there might be a bug in the
  patch `debian/patches/031_pam_include`

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pam/+bug/2087827/+subscriptions