Bug 92125

Summary:	[SSH2] extssh and server using ldap authentication
Product:	[Eclipse Project] Platform	Reporter:	Scott Cytacki <scott>
Component:	CVS	Assignee:	platform-cvs-inbox <platform-cvs-inbox>
Status:	ASSIGNED ---	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P5	CC:	ymnk
Version:	3.0.1	Keywords:	helpwanted
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:

Description Scott Cytacki

2005-04-20 14:35:18 EDT

It seems that the extssh connection mechanism has problems connecting to a
server using pam-ldap authentication.  We just switched our cvs server over to
this and several users started having problems.  Linux, Windows, and OSX users
all had problems several versions of Eclipse are being used.  Using the ext
connection mechanism works fine.

Here is someone with the exact same problem:
http://blogs.cocoondev.org/crafterm/archives/001940.html

It seems that extssh uses ssh1, so a search on this turned up that some other
ssh clients have trouble mixing ssh1 and ldap:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104576

In the CVS Repostories view the symptom is a long pause or error when opening a
folder.  First the sub folders are displayed and then a "Pending..." is shown
for a while.  Sometimes the "Pending..." disappears, sometimes a "I/O has been
interrupted." error message happens.

Comment 1 Michael Valenta

2005-04-20 14:53:40 EDT

The SSH client in Eclipse 3.0 does support SSH2 by using a Java SSH2 client 
(JSch). I've copied the provider of that client in case he can offer any 
insight into why there may be problems using pdap authentication.

Comment 2 Atsuhiko Yamanaka

2006-04-05 12:27:33 EDT

Hi, I'm developing jsch, which is the core of extssh.

I'm not so famillar with pam-ldap authentication for ssh,
but I guess it will use the keyboard-interactive authentication.
The recent Eclipse SDK 3.1(or later) has supported keyboard-interactive
authentication.  Can you try Eclipse SDK 3.2 M6?

Comment 3 Eclipse Webmaster

2019-09-06 16:04:27 EDT

This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.