From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC2BD1FF17E for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2025 09:57:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 799FB8F2E; Thu, 2 Oct 2025 09:57:59 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2025 09:57:56 +0200 To: "Shannon Sterz" , "Christian Ebner" , "Proxmox Backup Server development discussion" Message-Id: X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20251001131102.266920-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> <81c87a22-991a-418b-b93e-b343c7ac856e@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Shannon Sterz" X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1759391853355 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.058 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: [pbs-devel] Superseded: Re: [PATCH proxmox v2] login: use `ticket` if both it and `ticket_info` are provided X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" Superseded-by: https://lore.proxmox.com/all/DD7O7RLF50HZ.1NAU5VCE3AE7A@proxmox.com/T/#t On Thu Oct 2, 2025 at 9:50 AM CEST, Shannon Sterz wrote: > On Wed Oct 1, 2025 at 5:02 PM CEST, Christian Ebner wrote: >> On 10/1/25 3:11 PM, Shannon Sterz wrote: >>> previously the precense of `ticket_info` was assumed to indicate the >>> HTTPOnly authentication flow. the `ticket` field was ignore in that >>> case, because the client has no way of validating a ticket anyway. >>> >>> this commit changes the behaviour to assume that the server is not >>> trying to "trick us" and that the presence of a `ticket` field >>> indicates that this value should be used for authentication. if the >>> `ticket_info` field is also present, it will be ignored. >>> >>> this fixes an issue where authentication against later versions of >>> proxmox-backup-server 3.4 failed. including versions up to and >>> including version 3.4.6-1. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz >>> --- >> >> Only one question: Should the `SecondFactorChallenge::response_bytes()` >> also prioritize `ticket` over `ticket_info` to get the same flow behavior? > > yes sorry that was an oversight on my end, will send a v3 in a minute. > >> Other than that the changes look good to me, as they do follow the same >> intend of parsing the full ticket I did try >> to force via the compat mode in >> https://lore.proxmox.com/pdm-devel/DD70FPP8GIBO.2K8CWBW5XPL0K@proxmox.com/T/ >> >> Tested ticket parsing and request authentication works with this patch >> applied by using PDM remote add wizard (which uses the proxmox-login) >> for the following version: >> - PBS 3.4.0 (fresh install from ISO), 3.4.6, 4.0.11 (fresh install from >> ISO), 4.0.15 >> - PVE 8.4.0 (fresh install from ISO), 8.4.14, 9.0.3 (fresh install from >> ISO), 9.0.10 >> >> Please consider: >> >> Reviewed-by: Christian Ebner >> Tested-by: Christian Ebner _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel