nagiosxi account in htpasswd.users

[xlin125]

We have Nagios XI 5.x and Nagios XI 2014R2.7 installed on Redhat 6.7. I noticed there is an user account "nagiosxi" in the htpasswd.users file, but this account does not exist in the Nagios XI Web Interface, therefore this account "nagiosxi" is not used to login to Nagios XI web interface. If so, what this account "nagiosxi" is used for? For internal communication between some Nagios components? Thank.

[dwhitfield]

htpasswd.users is for Core access through XI. For example, the legacy reports are handled through the Nagios Core backend. Would you like more detail than that?

By default in 5, htpasswd.users should have nagiosadmin, and nagiosxi accounts. I can do some digging on 2014 if you'd like additional information.

[xlin125]

Thanks for the quick response!

It looks like that by default, there are only two accounts in passwd.users: nagiosadmin and nagiosxi on Nagios XI 5.x and Nagios XI 2014R2.7. I do not see a test account.

We have a security audit in place to check whether every account in passwd.users will match a user login account defined in the XI web interface. During this auditing, it was found that this account nagiosxi was not defined as a XI web interface user. So this brought a question on whether this account should be removed from passwd.users. Since this account nagiosxi is used for Core access through XI, I believe that we can not remove it. Any more detail information about this account will be appreciated. Thanks!

[dwhitfield]

Ok, I edited out the "test" bit in my last response for others to reference. I confirmed I had added a "test" account.

As far as the XI --> Core talking, you can actually see those two default users in the CCM under "Manage Users." I have attached a 5.3.2 screenshot, but it should be pretty similar across the 5.x versions at the very least.

Please let us know if you need any additional help tracking down what these users do. Thanks!

To be clear, you should *not* remove those users.

[xlin125]

I found the two default user "nagiosxi" and "nagiosadmin" under Configure->Core Config Manager->Config Manager Admin->Manage Config Access from our Nagios XI 2014R2.7 and Nagios XI 5.2.3. Thanks!

All the users, except user “nagiosxi”, in the htpasswd.users file match all the users listed under Admin->Users->Manage Users in Nagios XI GUI. I understand that this user "nagiosxi" is not used to access/logon to the Nagios XI web interface, so it is not added to the Nagios XI web interface. Can you give me more specific information on what exactly this user "nagiosxi" does? If this user "nagiosxi" gets removed from the htpasswd.users file, what would be the impact to the Nagios XI and what functions the Nagios XI will lose?

Accidentally, this user "nagiosxi" was removed just in the htpasswd.users file (by editing this file) on a Nagios XI server, but it is still in Configure->Core Config Manager->Config Manager Admin->Manage Config Access (not remove it from here). How can we "restore" this user "nagiosxi" (get it back to htpasswd.users)? Delete it from Configure->Core Config Manager->Config Manager Admin->Manage Config Access, and add it back so that it will be added to htpasswd.users file as well? I appreciate your help and continued support!

[avandemore]

Does XI > Admin > Reset Security Credentials > [Set Config Manager Backend Password] > Update Credentials resolve the issue?

[xlin125]

Yes, after doing "XI > Admin > Reset Security Credentials > [Set Config Manager Backend Password] > Update Credentials", the user "nagiosxi" is added back to htpasswd.users file. Thanks for the help!

For learning purpose, can you give me more specific information on what exactly this user "nagiosxi" does? If this user "nagiosxi" gets removed from the htpasswd.users file, what would be the impact to the Nagios XI and what functions the Nagios XI will lose? Based on the previous response, it looks like this user "nagiosxi" should not be removed.

[avandemore]

It is a required account for CCM to function. It is likely to be removed at a certain point in future development, but it's going to remain there for the time being.