Bug 148986 - recent pam_limits change breaks existing configurations
recent pam_limits change breaks existing configurations
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3
Classification: Red Hat
Component: pam (Show other bugs)
3.0
All Linux
high Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Tomas Mraz
Jay Turner
: Regression
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2005-02-17 14:22 EST by Cormac McGaughey
Modified: 2015-01-07 19:09 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-04-28 11:39:40 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Cormac McGaughey 2005-02-17 14:22:49 EST
Description of problem:
The 2004-12-21
(https://rhn.redhat.com/network/errata/details/index.pxt?eid=2597)
update introduced a change to pam_limits that breaks existing
limits.conf configurations.

Until this update the structure of limits.conf used @group to count
limits per user within the group. After this update @group counts for
the *whole* group, no per user. The &group counts per user.

The patch should not have changed it so that such a major change would
not affect the @group method, and made the &group apply limits group wide?

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
pam-0.75-62

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Take a pre pam-0.75-62 system and setup limits.conf to include the
line:
@group    -       maxlogins       6
where group is a group of users.
2. Each user within the group will get 7 logins before being stopped.
3. Apply the pam-0.75-62 update
4. Try logging in various users in the group and the whole group will
only get 7 logins.
  
Actual results:
pam_limits was changed so that the @group method was now counting  for
the whole group

Expected results:
pam_limits should have maintained the existing @group method and the
groupwide change should have only applied to &group

Additional info:
Comment 1 Tomas Mraz 2005-02-17 16:16:47 EST
Yes, this is a regression.
Comment 4 John Flanagan 2005-04-28 11:39:40 EDT
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2005-064.html
Comment 6 Tim Powers 2005-05-18 10:49:14 EDT
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on the solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2005-062.html

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.