Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] polkit: Allow password-less access for 'libvirt' group

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 03:44:46PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote: > On 04/29/2015 03:42 PM, Guido Günther wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 07:51:11PM -0400, Cole Robinson wrote: >>> Many users, who admin their own machines, want to be able to access >>> system libvirtd via tools like virt-manager without having to enter >>> a root password. Just google 'virt-manager without password' and >>> you'll find many hits. I've read at least 5 blog posts over the years >>> describing slightly different ways of achieving this goal. >>> >>> Let's finally add official support for this. >>> >>> Install a polkit-1 rules file granting password-less auth for any user >>> in the new 'libvirt' group. Create the group on RPM install >>> >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957300 >>> --- >>> daemon/50-libvirt.rules | 9 +++++++++ >>> daemon/Makefile.am | 13 +++++++++++++ >>> libvirt.spec.in | 15 +++++++++++++-- >>> 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 daemon/50-libvirt.rules >>> >>> diff --git a/daemon/50-libvirt.rules b/daemon/50-libvirt.rules >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000..01a15fa >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/daemon/50-libvirt.rules >>> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ >>> +// Allow any user in the 'libvirt' group to connect to system libvirtd >>> +// without entering a password. >>> + >>> +polkit.addRule(function(action, subject) { >>> + if (action.id == "org.libvirt.unix.manage" && >>> + subject.isInGroup("libvirt")) { >>> + return polkit.Result.YES; >>> + } >>> +}); >> >> That's what we're shipping in Debian since quiet some time: >> >> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-libvirt/libvirt.git/tree/debian/polki... >> >> even with the same group name (which came from the group that owns the >> socket for socket based permissions). Would be great to be consistent >> across distros. >> > > Latest version of the patch uses libvirtadm at Dan's suggestion... but if > there's already precedent with what debian is shipping we might want to stick > with plain 'libvirt'. > > Dan, thoughts? Yeah, since both Suse and Debian have shipped this aready with a group name of 'libvirt', we should use that for consistency Regards, Daniel