Hi dev folks,
as per Stefans request on the user list i am going to repost my request
on this list to continue here (still need to open a ticket for this).
Please bear with me if something is unclear or not in a format which is
normally expected here, first time on this list, just tell me and i'll
try to adapt asap.
Back to topic:
The original issue with some background can be found here:
I did configure a custom lua hook to negotiate the user from mod_lua and
did not configure any other auth module like basic, form or digest.
Just the Hook, the AuthzSVNAccessFile configuration and a Require
LuaHookCheckUserID /etc/apache2/auth.lua authcheck_hook early
This does not work although i would expect todo so.
The problem found is that mod_authz_svn does expect a AuthType to be set
and it even looks for Basic-Authorization headers, which is a detail it
should imho not care about because Authentication can be done in
arbitrary ways, e.g. via those lua hooks and i would expect that the
authorization is still done from mod_authz_svn after r.user was set in
the configured hook - but the request gets denied even before the "Check
User ID" hook had a chance to kick in and provide that r.user to the
I'll do not yet have an idea how to determine if auth is configured -
because for a unknown reason to me (i don't know the code well) - the
module wants to get that info and delegates that decision to the
ap_auth_type(r) != NULL
As described this is NULL, but the authentication hook from LUA is in
place so there is actually some authentication configured.
I'll still have a question running about that on the httpd list - what's
the best way to handle that and get that info (if we need that info at
all - i am not sure about that).
In the mean time my workaround is to set "AuthType Custom" in the httpd
configuration so that something is set to this variable and can continue
on that condition for now.
After that i'll applied the patch attached to remove the checks for the
I'll recompiled the module and did run the basic_tests.py suite against
it - same results - with and without those header checks. But i am not
sure if there is even a test which checks that detail.
To me it seems ok to remove those checks because the authentication must
not rely on basic authentication only - but maybe i am wrong here and
there are some assumptions made to this authorization module which i may
TODO like written above is to omit the usage of the AuthType for this
authn_configured = ap_auth_type(r) != NULL;
but i got no idea yet what else should be used or if this condition
could be removed at all.
That's it :). Feedback welcome and appreciated.
Received on 2018-01-24 15:49:45 CET
- application/x-pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s