Can't offline relogin with kde-screensaver

[Franz]

Binary package hint: libpam-ccreds

Hello,
I have upgraded from jaunty to karmic, and now i can't relogin when my Notebook is offline and the screen is lockd by the kde-screensaver!
The configuration workes fine under jaunty

log from the auth
--------------------------------------------------------
Oct 8 15:08:11 nbclient kcheckpass[4175]: Authentication failure for XXXX (invoked by uid XXXX)
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient kcheckpass[4177]: pam_unix(kde:auth): authentication failure; logname=XXXX uid=XXXX euid=XXXX tty=:0 ruser= rhost= user=XXXX
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient kcheckpass[4177]: (pam_krb5): none: pam_sm_authenticate: entry (0x0)
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient kcheckpass[4177]: (pam_krb5): XXXX: attempting authentication as XXXX@XXXX
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient kcheckpass[4177]: (pam_krb5): XXXX: krb5_get_init_creds_password: Cannot resolve network address for KDC in realm XXXX
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient kcheckpass[4177]: (pam_krb5): XXXX: pam_sm_authenticate: exit (failure)
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient kcheckpass[4178]: pam_ccreds: launching helper binary
Oct 8 15:08:51 nbclient ccreds_chkpwd[4178]: error initializing
------------------------------------------------------------

lsb_release -rd
Description: Ubuntu karmic (development branch)
Release: 9.10

apt-cache policy libpam-ccreds
libpam-ccreds:
  Installiert: 10-1
  Kandidat: 10-1
  Versions-Tabelle:
 *** 10-1 0
        500 http://ubuntu.knapp.at karmic/universe Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

With best regards
Franz

[Mike Javorski (mike-javorski)]

I have the same issue although with gnome-screensaver. If I re-attach to my session via the "switch user" option, I am able to re-authenticat. So obviously it's something related to how the screensaver's are configured to interact with pam/ccreds. I should also report that this config was working fine on jaunty (and intrepid) previously.

[Karl M. Davis (karlmdavis)]

The following is a workaround (solution?) for this problem:
$ sudo chmod u+s /sbin/ccreds_chkpwd

I believe this bug is a duplicate of Bug #480106.