Christian Balzer schrieb:
user User-Password == '%u'
(let alone that rewriting the quoting as suggested would
require quite more effort than some global config option
somewhere).
1. sed something suitable to escape quotes old_file tmp_file
2. sed s/\(User-Password *==
Stefan wrote:
[sed magic]
Oh, I did that of course today, once it was clear what the problem was.
My beef is that interpretation of the users file should not have changed.
Esp. not when it's not stated such in the Changelog and the resulting
problem can be very subtle and hard to diagnose.
Christian Balzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which of course breaks (at the import/parse stage) the moment you hit the
first user who has a single-quote in their password (large number of them
here as well).
You have a choice:
a) use double quotes, and escape double-quotes in passwords
b)
Hello,
I just upgraded a machine from the 0.9.3 Debian package to 1.0.0.
Everything seemed to work smoothly, but upon closer inspection it
started to give login failures for _some_ accounts. I've been unable
to determine what causes this, as other accounts in the same realm
kept on working fine.
As a followup, I did convert the cistron type users file
manually to the new format. It didn't change the behavior
one bit. My suspicion would be that another special
character used in passwords here might have turned unusable,
but I have no real evidence for that. Any developer that
can think
Christian Balzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And now the broken one. The record for that user is in the same users
file as the previous one, of course.
...
modcall[authorize]: module files returns notfound for request 1
Nope, it's not.
auth: No authenticate method (Auth-Type) configuration
Hello,
Christian Balzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And now the broken one. The record for that user is in the same users
file as the previous one, of course.
...
modcall[authorize]: module files returns notfound for request 1
Nope, it's not.
Yes, it quite is. Same file, works fine with
Christian Balzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And of course is not quite feasible and acceptable, having a few ten
thousand users with a % in their password. I was suspecting % for a
moment earlier, but _some_ users with that in their PW worked, most likely
because they didn't match the
Alan wrote:
Christian Balzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And of course is not quite feasible and acceptable, having a few ten
thousand users with a % in their password. I was suspecting % for a
moment earlier, but _some_ users with that in their PW worked, most likely
because they didn't match
9 matches
Mail list logo
