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 947011 - Suspected off-by-one in expiration calculations
Summary: Suspected off-by-one in expiration calculations
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: pam
Version: 6.4
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Tomas Mraz
QA Contact: Dalibor Pospíšil
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 835616 947775 994246 1070830
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-04-01 08:05 UTC by J.H.M. Dassen (Ray)
Modified: 2018-12-09 16:58 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

Fixed In Version: pam-1.1.1-18.el6
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Cause: The pam_unix module contained off-by-one error when comparing the date of user account expiration with the current date. Consequence: The real expiration of the account happened a day after the date specified by the chage -E command. Fix: The off-by-one error in the comparison in pam_unix was corrected. Result: The user account properly expires at the date set by the chage -E command.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-10-14 08:09:39 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2014:1579 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE pam bug fix update 2014-10-14 01:27:19 UTC

Description J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) 2013-04-01 08:05:49 UTC
Description of problem:
Customer noticed a discrepancy between pam_ldap's handling of the account expiration date and shadow-utils.

pam_ldap blocks user from logging in _on_ the account expiration date itself, not just after that date. This appears to be consistent with chage(1)'s description 
       -E, --expiredate EXPIRE_DATE
           Set the date or number of days since January 1, 1970 on which the
           user´s account will no longer be accessible. The date may also be
           expressed in the format YYYY-MM-DD (or the format more commonly
           used in your area). A user whose account is locked must contact the
           system administrator before being able to use the system again.

           Passing the number -1 as the EXPIRE_DATE will remove an account
           expiration date.
but shadow-utils itself is not consistent with that description.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
shadow-utils-4.1.4.2-13.el6

How reproducible:
TBD

Steps to Reproduce:
TBD
  
Actual results:
TBD

Expected results:
shadow-utils considers an entry expired on the expire date.

Additional info:
Details here to be reviewed by GSS case owner and/or backup TAM.

Comment 1 Tomas Mraz 2013-04-02 07:12:45 UTC
Yes, there is a one day discrepancy between the chage manual page and the pam_unix behavior in RHEL-5 and RHEL-6. This is fixed in the current pam in Fedora and RHEL-7.

There is a slight risk in fixing this because some customers might expect the old behavior, but it seems to me this is rather theoretical and given clear discrepancy between the manual page and the actual behavior I'd expect the customers to not depend on this.

Comment 5 RHEL Program Management 2013-09-11 12:12:37 UTC
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux release.  Product
Management has requested further review of this request by
Red Hat Engineering, for potential inclusion in a Red Hat
Enterprise Linux release for currently deployed products.
This request is not yet committed for inclusion in a release.

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2014-10-14 08:09:39 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2014-1579.html


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