<div>Hi Havoc,</div> <div> </div> <div>Back to the old thread...</div> <div> </div> <div>Attached please find the patch to the dbus-daemon that enables using ANONYMOUS auth mechanism in case the conf file enables it. You were right the change is pertty simple; I tested it both against dbus-1.1.2 and latest git repository - it seems to work well. I would appreciate if you include this patch in the coming 1.2.0 release.</div> <div> </div> <div>One issue of your possible concern may be that patched daemon will allow ANONYMOUS connections if its conf file doesn't specify ANY auth mechanism (which is the case for a default session.conf in ubuntu ditros for instance) - so this might be a potencial security hole. </div> <div> </div> <div>Couple of words regarding my rational to use ANONYMOUS auth mechanism - my plan is to use dbus in my project (which is ARM based embedded device running Linux) as central mean of IPC (daemon + various modules exposing their API on it; c++ bindings) . TCP transport will only be used for testing purposes ( e.g. invocation of various APIs from remote PC - testing server - using test scripts written in Python) and only in clean environment - that's why I don't really care of the security and ANONYMOUS is basically great for me. <br><br> </div> <div>P.S. generous credits for actually producing the patch should go to Mr. Andrey Olkhovik who happens to work under my guidance.</div> <div> </div> <div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/27/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Havoc Pennington</b> <<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:hp@redhat.com" target="_blank">hp@redhat.com</a>> wrote: </span> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Hi,<br><br>Sergey Struzh wrote:<br>> So now my question is whether it was thought through already or when (if <br>> ever) you're planning to do so? Is it your roadmap?<br>><br><br>Not right now. What I mean by "thought through" is for example, I don't<br>know why you would want a bus daemon that allowed anonymous access. So <br>step one in thinking it through is to describe (on this list) some of<br>the use-cases. Then we could talk about how to add the feature (which<br>would presumably be pretty simple, just have the bus daemon call<br>set_allow_anonymous() if ANONYMOUS is one of the auth mechanisms, or <br>something).<br><br>If the feature appears useful and we talk about how to add it, the<br>remaining step would be for a volunteer to write a patch (which should<br>be a very simple patch).<br><br>For the system and session bus, I don't know why ANONYMOUS would be <br>useful - so I am guessing you are using the bus daemon for some other<br>custom purpose, with a custom config file?<br><br>Havoc<br><br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Regards,<br><br>Sergey