X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=Pon0puZBPk/WSr4P 6HTdqqYD1gq99kfeF6a3ZbgilJvqHsjfgbXkeEu1uZih1chzhp+Q0mxWPR+hPzYw 8BW2UdzoRlg9USYe5eXT422/viHZrUS22zxHbpgB6KYUfrqCq5my4aJxBkcvAS3u tprcogXgAfoEty9iz16etsYf0Cs= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=qZpw02YcToCvgQW2HsYSF5 qa++U=; b=a8/dJ5KeHmQZaoK4h6+Dtg9qXMk60bbWeSu9YGoHi+G0ExVqi3KUe1 MGn2qV15W9+9ND/BubpdUSPAA8EQ+ca+NngUf+BDPu2JDBvJGPLSP/oK3NupeHAX 5hATBli0CuH5UsCn8nDnF4nCySk8egtzfAb+jZTlxSiuWtXvHOles= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: vms173023pub.verizon.net Message-id: <530054CC.9050405@cygwin.com> Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 01:03:56 -0500 From: "Larry Hall (Cygwin)" Reply-to: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: seteuid 1019: Operation not permitted References: In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit On 2/15/2014 7:08 PM, Evan Rowley wrote: > Everyone! > > I finally figured out what the problem was here. > > A group policy was in effect on the Windows machine. The group policy > is supposed to enforce the baseline security configuration as defined > by the Center for Internet Security (CIS) Benchmark for Windows > Servers. One particular Local User Security Policy setting was > disabled. It was "act as part of the operating system" - apparently > this is needed in order for SSHD in Cygwin to work. Yeah, this is mentioned in the closely related FAQ entry . The need for it is also spelled out in the /usr/share/csih/cygwin-service-installation-helper.sh script used by /usr/bin/ssh-host-config. I know, it's not real obvious that this is a requirement when you're installing or why. And when it's not unavailable the complaints that ensue aren't that easy to immediately track back to this security policy. I have this vague recollection that this particular policy is only necessary to support public key authentication, though I didn't test that. Regardless, that's small consolation if public key authentication is what you're looking for. ;-) -- Larry _____________________________________________________________________ A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting annoying in email? -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple