On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 06:49:22AM -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
[...]
+ err = virGetLastError(); + if (err && strstr(err->message, + _("no agent is available to authenticate"))) {
+ if (!pkagent) { + if (!(pkagent = virPolkitAgentCreate())) + goto cleanup; + } + agentstart++; + } else if (err && strstr(err->message, _("authentication failed:"))) {
String matching is pretty unpleasant. I think we can match on err->domain == VIR_FROM_POLKIT && err->code == VIR_ERR_AUTH_FAILED for this.
Using VIR_ERR_AUTH_FAILED I cannot distinguish between the failure of available agent or access denied by policy from virPolkitCheckAuth. Adjusting what virPolkitCheckAuth returns means more code modification since the assumption is -2 has 3 possible issues of which 2 currently are tested by a err->message comparison.
My point is that you don't actually need to distinguish those two cases directly. You can do this: if (err && err->code == VIR_FROM_POLKIT && err->code == VIR_ER_AUTH_FAILED) { if (!virDBusIsServiceRegistered(...polkit...)) { ....start agent... } ....retry auth... }
I would think in this case, I wouldn't want to create a text agent if access is denied by policy. So should I bite the bullet and adjust the return value checking? Or should I add a new error code "VIR_ERR_AUTH_DENY" and likewise adjust the code/tests to use that rather than the current string comparisons.
It is actually generally bad security practice to tell users /why/ auth failed - that we return different error messages for these two cases is probably something we should in fact fix. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|