kwallet-pam >= 5.18.4 and ecryptfs homes

[Nate Graham]

On 5/3/20 4:02 PM, Albert Astals Cid wrote:> Problem with SOLUTION 1 is 
that it adds lots of code in a relative "sensitive" piece of code like a 
pam module for for what it is a one time thing.
> Problem with SOLUTION 2 is that it's not a solution :D
> 
> 
> Opinions?

I feel pretty confident in your skills at implementing option 1 safely. 
:) Once the code is pushed out to users in 5.18.5, could we remove it in 
master to avoid an ongoing maintenance and security issues?

In any event, it seems like we don't really have much of a choice since 
as you mention, option 2 doesn't actually solve the problem for the 
typical user.

Nate