9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Charles Forsyth <charles.forsyth@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] p9any auth in u9fs: uid value in ticked is ignored
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 23:03:31 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOw7k5ivsZkW7AU1vPhX3yz_5OKLuTeNHHZp0UZ=cTYac=+=fA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG3N4d-ey3J-uKM91rgOFmMv1X6sDU+apZYxPeCDBB4_Mg6y9w@mail.gmail.com>

You could just define it in the first write to the auth file. In any
case, there wouldn't
be any need for the names in Tauth and Tattach to match, because the
server would
always use the result of the authentication.

I imagine the intention was that in Tauth, uname defined the user to
authenticate within
the space defined by the given aname (if relevant), and only that
uname (in that aname context)
would be authenticated; consequently it was reasonable to use the
resulting afid to authenticate
one or more matching Tattach requests. Thus the (uname, aname) on
Tauth should really be
constraining the initial state for authentication on the auth file
(ie, on success, it's taken to have
authenticated that uname). For instance, in the p9any case in
role=server, it should also be given user=uname,
and with p9sk1, only uname would be acceptable as {uid sub C}. Then
all the IDs involved would match.
(That doesn't preclude some sort of user name mapping, as is already
done for instance by fossil,
or a map of the name to an internal user ID as done by kfs.)

Note that on a shared server, with several unames actively accessing a
shared file server connection,
the users are trusting the server not to cheat with fids (ie, allow
one user to attach a fid,
however that's done, and then make that fid usable by another user by
accident, or to a miscreant by design).

On 10 October 2011 21:47, Yaroslav <yarikos@gmail.com> wrote:
> Uname in Tauth/Tattach indeed seem to be irrelevant for p9any but as
> it is external to 9P this may be a provision for other possible auth
> schemes where the uname may be the only place to provide an indentity
> being authenticated...
>
>



      reply	other threads:[~2011-10-10 22:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-10 12:07 Yaroslav
2011-10-10 12:39 ` Charles Forsyth
2011-10-10 14:01   ` Yaroslav
2011-10-10 16:18     ` Charles Forsyth
2011-10-10 20:47       ` Yaroslav
2011-10-10 22:03         ` Charles Forsyth [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAOw7k5ivsZkW7AU1vPhX3yz_5OKLuTeNHHZp0UZ=cTYac=+=fA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=charles.forsyth@gmail.com \
    --cc=9fans@9fans.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).