Hi everyone,
I saw couple of discussion around in this list as well as others about how to exploit ppolicy with ssh : here are some thought.
Currently, I am in a situation where I have inserted my users public ssh keys in ldap (openssh-ldappubkey shema) and instructed sshd to consult ldap for ssh public keys, adding in ssh_config :
AuthorizedKeysCommand /usr/bin/sss_ssh_authorizedkeys
I also have authorized password authentication , in ssh_config:
PasswordAuthentication yes
My current policy is the following :
- All my users must have a password in ldap (that is used by applications other than ssh)
- not all my users may have an ssh key (some never use ssh)
Everything works as I want.
I now want to introduce ppolicy overlay and would like to enforce rules for password management even for users that mainly use ssh keys.
Practically and basically : when a user with valid ssh key ask for an ssh connexion, I would like ssh to behave exactly as if this user had typed a correct "loging/password" and therefore check for ppolicy situation before granting access.
aka : - if the account is 'ppolicy desactivated', ssh would refuse to provide the session
- if the password is "ppolicy oudated", then ssh would warn to change it (and decrease 'pwdGraceAuthnLimit*'*?)
... and so on.
I thought about two options/alternatives to do that :
* try to tune pam (may be there would be a way to tell pam to check for user ppolicy fields once authentication has been done before granting access ?)
* add some sort of flag (aka: --ppolicy) to sss_ssh_authorizedkeys to instruct sss_ssh_authorizedkeys to check for user ppolicy (use 'ldap_default_bind_dn' as a binding user) and if there is an issue return a "ppolicy error message" rather than the user ssh key ?
These are just some thoughts.
I'm currently exploring the first option (but I'm not a 'pam' expert and I'm even not sure that the ssh authentication process goes through pam if a valid key is found, even with 'UsePAM yes').
I would appreciate any guidance, advices or experiences from you on that particular issue.
Thank you,
-- Olivier