Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 1680654

Summary: pam_systemd should stay optional in RHEL-8 (revert 1643928)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Reporter: Pavel Březina <pbrezina>
Component: authselectAssignee: Pavel Březina <pbrezina>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Steeve Goveas <sgoveas>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 8.0   
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: 8.0   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-02-26 08:42:58 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Pavel Březina 2019-02-25 13:19:22 UTC
We made pam_systemd module required, based on [1]. However, this was unfortunately not discussed by systemd maintainers and it turned out there are reasons to keep the module optional.

Quote Michal's comment [2]:
"I don't think that having pam_systemd as "required" is a good idea. RHEL components (certainly dbus-daemon at least) which come into play here are not resilient enough to support this. logind relies on dbus-daemon and on having functioning system bus connection. However, it is not uncommon to see systems where dbus-daemon is updated and restarted while dbus services are not touched (logind included). On other occasions we saw logind getting kicked out of the bus by dbus-daemon due to bugs. Granted, such system is not really in a fully functional state but you can still log in and correct the issue, e.g. reboot or restart all dbus services. When the module is "required" this is not possible, all future login attempts will fail and only way out is power-cycling the machine. 

Another problem is that this change was not co-ordinated with systemd upstream. I've asked Lennart and others for the opinion on this and they still think pam_systemd should stay optional."

Summary:
If logind is not able to use dbus-daemon for some reason (it is stopped, being restarted or there is some bug), users are not able to login and the system is effectively locked out.

Proposed solution is to require the module to be present but keep it optional so if it fails to register user session, user can still log in.

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1643928
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1643928#c11

Comment 1 Pavel Březina 2019-02-25 13:20:24 UTC
Ray, since you opened the original bug, do you have anything against reverting it?

Comment 2 Pavel Březina 2019-02-26 08:42:58 UTC
Closing as this was after all handled in original bz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1643928.