Anybody hiring me for PAM?

This post might sound like a nasty plug, but I’m really doing this because it seems like the only solution up to this point.

In the past few days some trouble came up on the PAM side again. Let me try to put this into prospective: if nowadays I can actually find some use in knowing how PAM works, I joined the PAM team four years ago while working on Gentoo/FreeBSD because I needed configuration files migrated to a format that worked there as well as Linux. Since then, Azarah went missing and the whole of PAM was shoved on my back. Nowadays, I maintain the Linux-PAM package, a bunch of random PAM modules, and should oversee over the general PAM configuration in Gentoo.

Unfortunately, this requires also a lot of coordinating skils, and time to do the coordination: maintainers of other PAM modules, and maintainers of packages that use PAM themselves, should talk with me about the default configurations and the like; instead I’m usually reactive on that matter. And that is, as you might guess, not the best of the experience, nor the easiest of the tasks.

I have written before about the need of a new pambase and this is now obvious to actually implement proper support for multiple authentication methods like Kerberos, LDAP, PKCS#11, YubiKey, … I have a few ideas on how to solve this, namely changing the current situation with a few predefined, hidden chains (.gentoo-session-minimal, .gentoo-session-console .gentoo-session-graphical) wrapped on the system-* series of chains, all generated with M4 rather than the current C preprocessor (that lacks any kind of arithmetic capabilities).

But even more than fixing pambase, there is the need to review the packages that use PAM. A few days ago, Samuli complained to me that ConsoleKit was not being executed properly on login(1) — turned out the problem was that /etc/pam.d/login was not calling back into system-local-login as it was expected to. Root cause was that the modified PAM chain file was replaced with the previous ones (which didn’t use that chain) after the major bump of sys-apps/shadow when it was picked up by Debian. Dated 24 Feb 2008. Over two and a half years ago.

While I cannot get rid of the fault of missing the revert; why did I miss it? Simple enough: Portage’s confmem feature never told me that /etc/pam.d/login was changed from the one I had before. It assumed that my local version was a modified one and thus accepted that one as the good one.

Now this makes the second revision bump and second stable request that I have to take care of to fix PAM-connected trouble; the previous one, back in July (for the bump) and last month (for stable) related to the chpasswd chain that had been broken for, well, almost the same time as this one.

In fixing another ConsoleKit problem, bug #342345 I found that the GDM and KDM chains are not compatible with pambase, and they both need more fine-grained control over the sessions (console and graphical sessions have different needs, in the latter case we have to skip motd/mail/lastlog modules).

A quick check around on the tinderbox told me that there are a number of PAM chain files that should be cleaned up, reduced, optimised and so on. And that the number of files there does not correspond with the number of files installed.

Basically, what we need now is an audit of all the PAM-using packages in the tree, beside the improvement of pambase as stated above. We’re talking of a month or two worth of work. Not something I’d do myself in spare time, not something I can do as it is during work time. It’s not simply a matter of writing what I did for the original pambase; it’s a work more in line with the Ruby NG situation, and that one we haven’t completed just yet with three people working on it, including a bunch of work time thrown in by me for a few jobs I took during the year.

So here’s the catch: nobody has helped me with PAM in years, and while Constanze is being ascended to developer status, I know she’s also pretty busy with her thesis so I cannot easily ask her to commit enough time to lift me from enough work. This means that we can either keep the current status-quo of just band-aiding through enough troubles so that we can keep it running, or somebody got to help me either with work or with funding. As I said, I’m already losing money with the tinderbox and I don’t want to lose time, sleep and (possible) money on working on something as ungrateful as PAM.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not asking for donations here; I’m asking to be paid to do a job, and that job is the auditing and review of (a part of) the PAM-using ebuilds. If you’re using Gentoo (and PAM) in production, you might be interested in hiring me to get this out of the way. I don’t even have much to pretend: €1500/month, one to three months time (depending on the deepness of the work you’d want to fund), you can provide the agreement details and give me a list of priority programs to work on (those that you use in your organisation). On the same terms, I’m willing to help you package new software that is not currently in portage in the spare time.

Let me know by mail if you’re interested. Extra points if you use GPG-encrypted email because that stuff doesn’t get sent to spam.

One thought on “Anybody hiring me for PAM?

  1. Sounds like some important work you’re doing. I’m sure someone out there with either resources or brains will value Gentoo enough to come out of the woodworks and help you. Thanks for the hacking you’ve squeezed in so far.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s