dropbear

dropbear

[Jaap de Jong]

Hi All,
dropbear 2013.56 is currently the most recent version.
Although not documented, they left out the functionality patched in with 
allow-nopw.patch in the 2013.56 release.
I would like to update to this new version, but is this functionality 
important?
Jaap

Re: dropbear

[Paul Eggleton]

On Wednesday 10 April 2013 14:55:02 Jaap de Jong wrote:
> dropbear 2013.56 is currently the most recent version.
> Although not documented, they left out the functionality patched in with
> allow-nopw.patch in the 2013.56 release.

How did you find this out?

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: dropbear

[Jaap de Jong]

On 04/10/2013 04:04 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 April 2013 14:55:02 Jaap de Jong wrote:
>> dropbear 2013.56 is currently the most recent version.
>> Although not documented, they left out the functionality patched in with
>> allow-nopw.patch in the 2013.56 release.
> How did you find this out?
the patch fails and inspection of the code learns that it can't be applied.
I found some other way to accomplish the same though..

diff -urN a/svr-runopts.c b/svr-runopts.c
--- a/svr-runopts.c    2013-03-21 16:29:35.000000000 +0100
+++ b/svr-runopts.c    2013-04-10 15:11:51.000000000 +0200
@@ -115,7 +115,7 @@
      svr_opts.norootlogin = 0;
      svr_opts.noauthpass = 0;
      svr_opts.norootpass = 0;
-    svr_opts.allowblankpass = 0;
+    svr_opts.allowblankpass = 1;
      svr_opts.inetdmode = 0;
      svr_opts.portcount = 0;
      svr_opts.hostkey = NULL;

> Cheers,
> Paul
>

Re: dropbear

[Paul Eggleton]

On Wednesday 10 April 2013 16:37:33 Jaap de Jong wrote:
> On 04/10/2013 04:04 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > On Wednesday 10 April 2013 14:55:02 Jaap de Jong wrote:
> >> dropbear 2013.56 is currently the most recent version.
> >> Although not documented, they left out the functionality patched in with
> >> allow-nopw.patch in the 2013.56 release.
> > 
> > How did you find this out?
> 
> the patch fails and inspection of the code learns that it can't be applied.

Ah right - to explain what has happened, I developed a new patch to change 
dropbear so that the functionality is now controlled through a command-line 
switch, and that is now configured in the image using a script in 
/etc/default/; if you look at the dropbear recipe in master you can see how it 
works. This avoids the need to rebuild dropbear depending upon the value of 
IMAGE_FEATURES which was not really ideal.

If you want to use the latest version of dropbear with an older branch I'd 
suggest just taking the dropbear recipe in master, removing the nopw-option 
patch (which has been applied).

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: dropbear

[Paul Eggleton]

On Wednesday 10 April 2013 15:47:09 Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 April 2013 16:37:33 Jaap de Jong wrote:
> > On 04/10/2013 04:04 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 10 April 2013 14:55:02 Jaap de Jong wrote:
> > >> dropbear 2013.56 is currently the most recent version.
> > >> Although not documented, they left out the functionality patched in
> > >> with
> > >> allow-nopw.patch in the 2013.56 release.
> > > 
> > > How did you find this out?
> > 
> > the patch fails and inspection of the code learns that it can't be
> > applied.
> 
> Ah right - to explain what has happened, I developed a new patch to change
> dropbear so that the functionality is now controlled through a command-line
> switch, and that is now configured in the image using a script in
> /etc/default/; if you look at the dropbear recipe in master you can see how
> it works. This avoids the need to rebuild dropbear depending upon the value
> of IMAGE_FEATURES which was not really ideal.
> 
> If you want to use the latest version of dropbear with an older branch I'd
> suggest just taking the dropbear recipe in master, removing the nopw-option
> patch (which has been applied).

If you do do this you'll also need to apply this patch:

http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=0937054e6e3e02565f57e60a8bdc14b0ad62e249

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre

Re: dropbear

[Jaap de Jong]

On 04/10/2013 04:50 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 April 2013 15:47:09 Paul Eggleton wrote:
>> On Wednesday 10 April 2013 16:37:33 Jaap de Jong wrote:
>>> On 04/10/2013 04:04 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday 10 April 2013 14:55:02 Jaap de Jong wrote:
>>>>> dropbear 2013.56 is currently the most recent version.
>>>>> Although not documented, they left out the functionality patched in
>>>>> with
>>>>> allow-nopw.patch in the 2013.56 release.
>>>> How did you find this out?
>>> the patch fails and inspection of the code learns that it can't be
>>> applied.
>> Ah right - to explain what has happened, I developed a new patch to change
>> dropbear so that the functionality is now controlled through a command-line
>> switch, and that is now configured in the image using a script in
>> /etc/default/; if you look at the dropbear recipe in master you can see how
>> it works. This avoids the need to rebuild dropbear depending upon the value
>> of IMAGE_FEATURES which was not really ideal.
>>
>> If you want to use the latest version of dropbear with an older branch I'd
>> suggest just taking the dropbear recipe in master, removing the nopw-option
>> patch (which has been applied).
Seems that the nopw-option.patch is added to dropbear rev 2013.56, so 
that one should be remove also from the list of patches to apply.
> If you do do this you'll also need to apply this patch:
>
> http://cgit.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=0937054e6e3e02565f57e60a8bdc14b0ad62e249
Ok.
Thanks for your help!

> Cheers,
> Paul
>