|Product:||Apache httpd-2||Reporter:||Gregg L. Smith <gls>|
|Component:||mod_auth_digest||Assignee:||Apache HTTPD Bugs Mailing List <bugs>|
Description Gregg L. Smith 2010-12-07 13:09:38 UTC
Use of mod_auth_digest on Vista & beyond = show stopper at command line. This was on Win Vista, 2.3 @ r1040791 running at command line. Tested same on Win7. This does not affect Apache running as a service, even running as limited user, so I'm not sure quite to where to place this. It's per design but design doesn't always work. [Mon Dec 06 21:54:29.868000 2010] [auth_digest:notice] [pid 704:tid 476] Digest: generating secret for digest authentication ... [Mon Dec 06 21:54:29.942000 2010] [auth_digest:error] [pid 704:tid 476] (OS 5)Access is denied. : Failed to create shared memory segment on file C:\\Users\\MeMyselfNI\\AppData\\Local\\Temp/authdigest_shm.704 [Mon Dec 06 21:54:29.942000 2010] [auth_digest:error] [pid 704:tid 476] (OS 5)Access is denied. : Digest: failed to initialize shm - all nonce-count checking, one-time nonces, and MD5-sess algorithm disabled Configuration Failed The Windows user's options are to turn off the UAC, run as Administrator or not load/use mod_auth_digest when running/testing from the command line. When running as a service, the files are physically created. C:\Users\JustMe\AppData\Local\Temp\authdigest_shm.4216 C:\Users\JustMe\AppData\Local\Temp\authdigest_shm.4668 I thought possibly writing to the logs directory might work but no again; [Tue Dec 07 09:20:32.045000 2010] [auth_digest:error] [pid 5804:tid 476] (OS 5)Access is denied. : Failed to create shared memory segment on file c:/Apache23/logs/authdigest_5804.shm I then wondered how does the SSLSessionCache do it but that is well over my head and it does not leave a file behind. Technically I guess this is minor and probably should just be documented. Either added to the mod_auth_digest doc or the Windows platform doc with a link to it from the mod_auth_digest doc.
Comment 1 William A. Rowe Jr. 2010-12-07 15:52:40 UTC
Just wondering if an unnamed SHM (not file-backed) would be viable on win32?