debcrafters-packages team mailing list archive
-
debcrafters-packages team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #02417
[Bug 2087827] Re: Pam includes does not look in /usr/lib/pam.d
This bug was fixed in the package pam - 1.5.3-5ubuntu5.4
---------------
pam (1.5.3-5ubuntu5.4) noble-security; urgency=medium
* SECURITY UPDATE: privilege escalation via pam_namespace
- debian/patches/pam_namespace_170.patch: sync pam_namespace module to
version 1.7.0.
- debian/patches/pam_namespace_post170-*.patch: add post-1.7.0 changes
from upstream git tree.
- debian/patches/pam_namespace_revert_abi.patch: revert ABI change to
prevent unintended issues in running daemons.
- debian/patches/CVE-2025-6020-1.patch: fix potential privilege
escalation.
- debian/patches/CVE-2025-6020-2.patch: add flags to indicate path
safety.
- debian/patches/CVE-2025-6020-3.patch: secure_opendir: do not look at
the group ownership.
- debian/patches/pam_namespace_o_directory.patch: removed, included in
patch cluster above.
- CVE-2025-6020
-- Marc Deslauriers <marc.deslauriers@xxxxxxxxxx> Thu, 12 Jun 2025
10:45:28 -0400
** Changed in: pam (Ubuntu Noble)
Status: Fix Committed => Fix Released
** CVE added: https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=2025-6020
--
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 Released
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