Bug 58891 - Problems with a host identification for rsync clients
Problems with a host identification for rsync clients
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: rsync (Show other bugs)
i386 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Bill Nottingham
Aaron Brown
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2002-01-26 17:31 EST by Michal Jaegermann
Modified: 2014-03-16 22:25 EDT (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2002-01-27 11:32:22 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Michal Jaegermann 2002-01-26 17:31:58 EST
Description of Problem:

With the current rsync (and version 2.5.1 too) I run into the following:

when trying to connect to a local rsync server (responds to some chosen
addresses) I see the following:

rsync on 7.2.updates from unknown (209.xxx.xxx.xxx)

The ip number in question is really a number of my firewall and does
resolve correctly, i.e. 'dig -x ....' and 'dig (name)' provide really
the same information.

It is getting worse.  When connecting from a client which has its own
entry in /etc/hosts on a server I get:

rsync: reverse name lookup mismatch on fd0 - spoofed address?

and a connection is rejected.

Replacing the routine which does name checks with one from rsync-2.3.3
restores sanity and my connections are no longer from "unknown" and
spoofing is not suggested.  Maybe checks are more permissive but otherwise
things are not workable.

This bug could be really in libresolv, or somewhere else, and the system
running rsync server is no longer any "official release" of anything
(say that somewhat close to Red Hat 6.2), so this may not happen somewhere
else, but it is worth checking.
Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2002-01-27 01:18:16 EST
Current == current 7.2, or current *errata* 7.2?
Comment 2 Michal Jaegermann 2002-01-27 11:00:02 EST
Sorry.  Tried with current from errata but the code in question, i.e.
'client_name()' in socket.c, did not change even in original sources through
quite a few versions.   I did not check when change occured but 'client_name()'
from rsync-2.3.3, used as a replacement with all other code intact,
Comment 3 Bill Nottingham 2002-01-27 11:32:16 EST
The reason I ask is because the ipv6 patch in the original 7.2 rsync broke some
host resolution code; this was changed in 2.4.6-8.
Comment 4 Michal Jaegermann 2002-01-27 23:23:33 EST
Bill, you are right.  Properly recompiled rsync-2.4.6-0.6 and also
rsync-2.4.6-8 does not have name resolution troubles.  Between these,
security patches and sources from rsync.samba.org I had to mess up something.
Sorry for the false alarm.

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