[9fans] factotum question - Plan9

This is a discussion on [9fans] factotum question - Plan9 ; Hi all, I don't understand this: 1. On console of my auth/cpu/file server I did as user bootes: "cat /mnt/factotum/ctl" And I could see some keys stored there. 2. I connect to the same server with drawterm, login as bootes ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: [9fans] factotum question

  1. [9fans] factotum question

    Hi all,

    I don't understand this:

    1. On console of my auth/cpu/file server I did as user bootes: "cat
    /mnt/factotum/ctl"
    And I could see some keys stored there.

    2. I connect to the same server with drawterm, login as bootes and
    type the same command.
    But there are no keys stored there.
    Why?


    Antonin

  2. Re: [9fans] factotum question

    hello

    I think you should read the paper about the namespaces

    The factotum is running in the console namespace, when you log in, you
    create a new namespace, and probably your profile runs auth/factotum,
    doesn't remember if it is by default.

    try to play with namespaces under rio, mount things on one window and
    try to access them from other window, for example.

    slds.

    gabi



    On 9/28/07, Antonin Vecera wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I don't understand this:
    >
    > 1. On console of my auth/cpu/file server I did as user bootes: "cat
    > /mnt/factotum/ctl"
    > And I could see some keys stored there.
    >
    > 2. I connect to the same server with drawterm, login as bootes and
    > type the same command.
    > But there are no keys stored there.
    > Why?
    >
    >
    > Antonin
    >


  3. Re: [9fans] factotum question

    > 1. On console of my auth/cpu/file server I did as user bootes: "cat
    > /mnt/factotum/ctl"
    > And I could see some keys stored there.
    >
    > 2. I connect to the same server with drawterm, login as bootes and
    > type the same command.
    > But there are no keys stored there.
    > Why?


    the kernel starts factotum for the hostowner but if you
    drawterm in you need to start your own factotum. generally
    this is done from $home/lib/profile. i think glenda's profile is
    missing this case. this is what i have

    [...]
    case cpu
    if (test -e /mnt/term/mnt/wsys) {
    # rio already running
    wsys = /mnt/term^`{cat /mnt/term/env/wsys}
    bind -a /mnt/term/mnt/wsys /dev
    if(test -f /mnt/term/dev/label)
    echo -n $sysname > /mnt/term/dev/label
    prompt=($sysname^'; ') ; fn $sysname {}
    }
    bind /mnt/term/dev/cons /dev/cons
    bind /mnt/term/dev/consctl /dev/consctl
    bind -a /mnt/term/dev /dev
    news
    if (! test -e /mnt/term/mnt/wsys) {
    # cpu call from drawterm
    plumber
    auth/factotum
    exec rio
    }
    }

    - erik


  4. Re: [9fans] factotum question

    Yes, as I understand each window/process has its own namespace.
    But I guess some sources can be shared among them, f.e. my
    passwords/keys stored in factotum.
    I define my problem again:
    If I login on terminal I can see my factotum keys. That's right.
    But If I login with drawterm I can't see my factotum keys.
    Why?

    Maybe I should bind/mount something.
    But both namespaces contain "mount -a '#s/factotum' /mnt".
    Is it not enough?
    auth/factotum in drawterm doesn't help.


    Antonin


    On 9/28/07, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
    > hello
    >
    > I think you should read the paper about the namespaces
    >
    > The factotum is running in the console namespace, when you log in, you
    > create a new namespace, and probably your profile runs auth/factotum,
    > doesn't remember if it is by default.
    >
    > try to play with namespaces under rio, mount things on one window and
    > try to access them from other window, for example.
    >
    > slds.
    >
    > gabi
    >
    >
    >
    > On 9/28/07, Antonin Vecera wrote:
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > I don't understand this:
    > >
    > > 1. On console of my auth/cpu/file server I did as user bootes: "cat
    > > /mnt/factotum/ctl"
    > > And I could see some keys stored there.
    > >
    > > 2. I connect to the same server with drawterm, login as bootes and
    > > type the same command.
    > > But there are no keys stored there.
    > > Why?
    > >
    > >
    > > Antonin
    > >

    >


  5. Re: [9fans] factotum question

    I got it! I misunderstand to factotum. :-(
    I need to use secstore.

    Antonin


    On 9/28/07, Antonin Vecera wrote:
    > Yes, as I understand each window/process has its own namespace.
    > But I guess some sources can be shared among them, f.e. my
    > passwords/keys stored in factotum.
    > I define my problem again:
    > If I login on terminal I can see my factotum keys. That's right.
    > But If I login with drawterm I can't see my factotum keys.
    > Why?
    >
    > Maybe I should bind/mount something.
    > But both namespaces contain "mount -a '#s/factotum' /mnt".
    > Is it not enough?
    > auth/factotum in drawterm doesn't help.
    >
    >
    > Antonin
    >
    >
    > On 9/28/07, Gabriel Diaz wrote:
    > > hello
    > >
    > > I think you should read the paper about the namespaces
    > >
    > > The factotum is running in the console namespace, when you log in, you
    > > create a new namespace, and probably your profile runs auth/factotum,
    > > doesn't remember if it is by default.
    > >
    > > try to play with namespaces under rio, mount things on one window and
    > > try to access them from other window, for example.
    > >
    > > slds.
    > >
    > > gabi
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > On 9/28/07, Antonin Vecera wrote:
    > > > Hi all,
    > > >
    > > > I don't understand this:
    > > >
    > > > 1. On console of my auth/cpu/file server I did as user bootes: "cat
    > > > /mnt/factotum/ctl"
    > > > And I could see some keys stored there.
    > > >
    > > > 2. I connect to the same server with drawterm, login as bootes and
    > > > type the same command.
    > > > But there are no keys stored there.
    > > > Why?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Antonin
    > > >

    > >

    >


+ Reply to Thread