April 2009 - Installer-dev - lists.apple.com

Re: setuid installer?
by Iceberg-Dev 03 Apr '09

03 Apr '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding :from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; bh=/DTuR4L1+dlj3ECAxfS0qcYOoX7rTd9bAPeyk3LBh0k=; b=u8rBPeH0nB/nYd/5LIQpMkUp4uFUukcKlucsvKTgm6Y7F+Is5Ck52PwpLVxUXLAzmO omttINpTF3Y39tT6ttmYCcUMx8G3ipVeIlhSzjootZmCDnXKF2T+o3vUnFWDpjKKe5xb 8RrBjJtqtVpF5k5LrhdxlN1gZraxP7/rGhDiI= Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc :content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=S19sfMYWvesYFf8Ymh8nFDhGQzikfpFbUei/SqZK5yTXxg+afxkC0Yy3Kr11l9JU1i IokLQJP1DBt9fAXtyGVTXscs4hQmeaTh+mRD/UYVZqMM1DDC9ZuTf1b/KpJD1As5e5jl I2PoEopXLuaUK6GhOw+nvn31oNxO4aBzIYYi8= On Apr 4, 2009, at 1:37 AM, Rick Mann wrote: On Apr 3, 2009, at 15:55:58, Karl Kuehn wrote: I don't know why the c program is not working, but in 10.5 Apple restricted setuid to only being available to compiled programs (ie: no scripts). It occurs to me...how do pre- and post-flight scripts get to do privileged operations during installation? Or can they not? They can. And to do this, the Installer.app application or the Install.frmework code uses the appropriate C API to execute an helper tool or script with privileges once they obtained them (through the Admin password dialog in the case of Installer.app) _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: setuid installer?
by Rick Mann 03 Apr '09

03 Apr '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Apr 3, 2009, at 15:55:58, Karl Kuehn wrote: _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… I don't know why the c program is not working, but in 10.5 Apple restricted setuid to only being available to compiled programs (ie: no scripts). It occurs to me...how do pre- and post-flight scripts get to do privileged operations during installation? Or can they not? This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: setuid installer?
by Rick Mann 03 Apr '09

03 Apr '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com On Apr 3, 2009, at 15:55:58, Karl Kuehn wrote: On Apr 3, 2009, at 3:42 PM, Rick Mann wrote: Don't get #2 at all. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… We want to execute our updates in the background, but they require authentication. I've tried creating a script with setuid set, but the installer still complains that it needs to be authenticated. I then wrote a tiny C program that execs my script, and prints the effective user ID, but it still complains. I don't know why the c program is not working, but in 10.5 Apple restricted setuid to only being available to compiled programs (ie: no scripts). I changed the C program to call the installer command invocation directly, rather than calling a script that calls it. This seemed to work. But if you are going to need root permissions to update things, then don't you need it during the install? And if so, then if you put in a postflight script it should run as root already (script or program), solving your problem. When the product is first installed, it is done via a normal, user- initiated installation process, and they enter their credentials at the appropriate time. The product is a combination of faceless background app (agent), which is always running, and GUI, which is launched as needed by the user. When a new version becomes available, the old version no longer works. If the GUI is not running, we silently update the components and re- launch the agent. If the GUI is running, we display an alert before doing this, and relaunch it after. However, I am going to urge you to think this through, there are two cases you should make sure that your installer (and by extension now your updater) takes into consideration: 1) The installer could be run via something like Apple Remote Desktop and be running either underneath a totally unaware user, or it could be running behind the loginwindow. Both of these circumstances mean that you should not have any GUI component that is not part of the normal installer system (ie: installer bundles). 2) Your installer could be run on a filesystem other than the booted one, even if you have set the "only on booted volume" flag. This is used internally by Apple in packaging computers (for special runs), and projects like InstaDMG also do this. I'm not sure of the impact you're cautioning me about in these two instances. It should never run behind the login window, because we don't launch the agent unless the user is logged in. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: setuid installer?
by Karl Kuehn 03 Apr '09

03 Apr '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:cc:message-id:from:to :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:x-mailer; bh=pEf0cwvi8DJurATpCdX0+XzEB0TcmJCoArCgWpuhGis=; b=Pib9lPyMcKgkzBcYNh/Gn9IxmHsL78K0aSgiRnD39NRl3MbsHR24if3HLVUBbSxccJ rK0NP8IcZ3ww9He+OL05yFQZfSkn/MpIvzczzYetwqaJcieCs0H6CI/TLlPZUJ/6mWBD f0H73JGYjUX8WxP0sHFdw5oi7DGMwBCrhShzo= Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=cc:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; b=qRdEaMeQwiomIlejjNTj8kBN5G/omzVAt/1hGUiioL4rqRIbuMkn9PNgJDnzzilGjA F9kcHS2+//I+yiSoSF28i7f70PYHmDFepTjpXR9ICyBLfV5lGaHQ9wRA1SzTX/kKGqLj V60Ja1U5ixcT6Wk6VVetuEr9/adCg/pyuFOOs= On Apr 3, 2009, at 3:42 PM, Rick Mann wrote: Both of these are used in large-scale deployments of computers. -- Karl Kuehn larkost(a)softhome.net _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… We want to execute our updates in the background, but they require authentication. I've tried creating a script with setuid set, but the installer still complains that it needs to be authenticated. I then wrote a tiny C program that execs my script, and prints the effective user ID, but it still complains. I don't know why the c program is not working, but in 10.5 Apple restricted setuid to only being available to compiled programs (ie: no scripts). But if you are going to need root permissions to update things, then don't you need it during the install? And if so, then if you put in a postflight script it should run as root already (script or program), solving your problem. However, I am going to urge you to think this through, there are two cases you should make sure that your installer (and by extension now your updater) takes into consideration: 1) The installer could be run via something like Apple Remote Desktop and be running either underneath a totally unaware user, or it could be running behind the loginwindow. Both of these circumstances mean that you should not have any GUI component that is not part of the normal installer system (ie: installer bundles). 2) Your installer could be run on a filesystem other than the booted one, even if you have set the "only on booted volume" flag. This is used internally by Apple in packaging computers (for special runs), and projects like InstaDMG also do this. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

setuid installer?
by Rick Mann 03 Apr '09

03 Apr '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com $ ./a.out Real UID = 501 Effective UID = 0 Real GID = 20 Effective GID = 20 installer: This package requires authentication to install. What am I doing wrong? Thanks! _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… We want to execute our updates in the background, but they require authentication. I've tried creating a script with setuid set, but the installer still complains that it needs to be authenticated. I then wrote a tiny C program that execs my script, and prints the effective user ID, but it still complains. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0

Re: Upgrading and not replacing in a distribution package on Tiger or Leopard
by Dymyr Winicki 02 Apr '09

02 Apr '09

site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com Hi I have looked into the packageUpgradeAction properties Kind Regards ...dymyr On 28/03/2009, at 11:40 AM, Iceberg-Dev wrote: On Mar 27, 2009, at 5:21 AM, Dymyr Winicki wrote: [...] </choice> If there is an easier way of doing this I would like to know. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev(a)lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.… and on Leopard if the receipt exists for the same package id it always says upgrade even though it may be a downgrade so the property seems to have a bug with Leopard as far as I can gather. Theoretically Packages and Distributions can be made to upgrade and not just replace files however using PackageMaker from the gui I haven't yet been able to do this. With Packages I have using Iceberg. I have had trouble using Iceberg with metapackages with large number of files in the – With a simple mockup it upgrades and doesn't downgrade except with Leopard where it just replaces the files anyway. I have not seen any answer on the forum (either to my questions or to others) that have broached this – so I will post my answer in the hope it will help others. <choice id="choice1" title="btcc" Location="/Applications" selected="pm_choice1_selected()" enabled="false" start_enabled="false" > <pkg-ref id="com.edalive.btcc.pkg"/> This will select if the same or an upgrade but in all cases will not enable to be changed. I also changed customLocation to the keyword Location which means you cannot change the location of the install. With distribution scripts, you can tune more finely the behavior between upgrade, downgrade and so on of a choice. Have a look at the packageUgradeAction properties of the choice class. This email sent to site_archiver(a)lists.apple.com

1 0