Using the latest, stable Ansible build, I have an odd problem where my playbook hangs on one server during "Gathering_Facts" but works fine on other similar servers when using Sudo. On the Ansible server, I run as my user (NIS user) and use sudo (as root) on the remote server to make changes. If I remove Sudo from this setup, everything works fine.


Software Versions

  • OS: RHEL 6.4
  • Ansible version: ansible 1.8.2
  • Sudo version:
    Sudo version 1.8.6p3
    Sudoers policy plugin version 1.8.6p3
    Sudoers file grammar version 42
    Sudoers I/O plugin version 1.8.6p3
  • SSH version: OpenSSH_5.3p1, OpenSSL 1.0.0-fips 29 Mar 2010

Server Map

                   -------- User1@Server1: sudo -H -S -p (Hangs on Gathering_Facts)
User1@Ansible ----
                   -------- User1@Server2: sudo -H -S -p (Works fine)


  • User1: NIS accessible user on both Server1 & Server2.
  • root: local root user for each server.

Ansible Configuration

Relevant parts of my ansible.cfg.


sudo           = true
sudo_user      = root
ask_sudo_pass  = True
ask_pass       = True
gathering = smart
# change this for alternative sudo implementations
sudo_exe = sudo

# what flags to pass to sudo
#sudo_flags = -H
# remote_user = ansible

Here is a simple test playbook to touch an empty file and then remove it. Really, I'm just wanting to test if I can get Ansible to correctly use sudo on the remote server. If the playbook runs at all, I'm in good shape.


- hosts: Server1:Server2
  - test_file: '/tmp/ansible_test_file.txt'
  sudo: yes
  - name: create empty file to test connectivity and sudo access
    file: dest={{ test_file }}
          owner=root group=root mode=0600
    - clean
  - name: clean
    file: dest={{ test_file }}

Sudo Configuration


Host_Alias SRV     = Server1, Server2
User_Alias SUPPORT = User1, User2, User3

This sudo configuration works just fine on BOTH servers. No problems with sudo itself.

How I Run It All

Very simple:

$ ansible-playbook test.yml
SSH password: 
sudo password [defaults to SSH password]:

PLAY [Server1:Server2] ********************************************** 

GATHERING FACTS *************************************************************** 
ok: [Server2]
failed: [Server1] => {"failed": true, "parsed": false}

Sorry, try again.
[sudo via ansible, key=mxxiqyvztlfnbctwixzmgvhwfdarumtq] password: 
sudo: 1 incorrect password attempt

TASK: [create empty file to test connectivity and sudo access] **************** 
changed: [Server2]

NOTIFIED: [clean] ************************************************************* 
changed: [Server2]

PLAY RECAP ******************************************************************** 
           to retry, use: --limit @/home/User1/test.retry

Server1                 : ok=0    changed=0    unreachable=0    failed=1   
Server2                 : ok=3    changed=2    unreachable=0    failed=0

Fails regardless of if I explicitly enter both the SSH/Sudo passwords as well as implicitly (letting sudo pass default to SSH).

Remote Server Logs

Server1 (Fails)


Dec 31 15:21:10 Server1 sshd[27093]: Accepted password for User1 from x.x.x.x port 51446 ssh2
Dec 31 15:21:10 Server1 sshd[27093]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session opened for user User1 by (uid=0)
Dec 31 15:21:11 Server1 sshd[27095]: subsystem request for sftp
Dec 31 15:21:11 Server1 sudo: pam_unix(sudo:auth): authentication failure; logname=User1 uid=187 euid=0 tty=/dev/pts/1 ruser=User1 rhost=  user=User1 
Dec 31 15:26:13 Server1 sudo: pam_unix(sudo:auth): conversation failed
Dec 31 15:26:13 Server1 sudo: pam_unix(sudo:auth): auth could not identify password for [User1]
Dec 31 15:26:13 Server1 sudo:  User1 : 1 incorrect password attempt ; TTY=pts/1 ; PWD=/home/User1 ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/bin/sh -c echo SUDO-SUCCESS-mxxiqyvztlfnbctwixzmgvhwfdarumtq; LANG=C LC_CTYPE=C /usr/bin/python /tmp/.ansible/tmp/ansible-tmp-1420039272.66-164754043073536/setup; rm -rf /tmp/.ansible/tmp/ansible-tmp-1420039272.66-164754043073536/ >/dev/null 2>&1
Dec 31 15:26:13 Server1 sshd[27093]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session closed for user User1 

Server2 (runs fine)


Dec 31 15:21:12 Server2 sshd[31447]: Accepted password for User1 from x.x.x.x port 60346 ssh2
Dec 31 15:21:12 Server2 sshd[31447]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session opened for user User1 by (uid=0)
Dec 31 15:21:12 Server2 sshd[31449]: subsystem request for sftp
Dec 31 15:21:12 Server2 sudo:  User1 : TTY=pts/2 ; PWD=/home/User1 ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/bin/sh -c echo SUDO-SUCCESS-vjaypzeocvrdlqalxflgcrcoezhnbibs; LANG=C LC_CTYPE=C /usr/bin/python /tmp/.ansible/tmp/ansible-tmp-1420039272.68-243930711246149/setup; rm -rf /tmp/.ansible/tmp/ansible-tmp-1420039272.68-243930711246149/ >/dev/null 2>&1
Dec 31 15:21:14 Server2 sshd[31447]: pam_unix(sshd:session): session closed for user User1 

STrace Output

Here is the output from strace when targeting the root user's ansible command. Command:

while [[ -z $(ps -fu root|grep [a]nsible|awk '{print $2}') ]]; do
strace -vfp $(ps -fu root|grep [a]nsible|awk '{print $2}') -o /root/strace.out`


23650 select(0, NULL, NULL, NULL, {1, 508055}) = 0 (Timeout)
23650 socket(PF_NETLINK, SOCK_RAW, 9)   = 10
23650 fcntl(10, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC)    = 0
23650 readlink("/proc/self/exe", "/usr/bin/sudo", 4096) = 13
23650 sendto(10, "|\0\0\0L\4\5\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\0op=PAM:authentic"..., 124, 0, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, 12) = 124
23650 poll([{fd=10, events=POLLIN}], 1, 500) = 1 ([{fd=10, revents=POLLIN}])
23650 recvfrom(10, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\1\0\0\0b\\\0\0\0\0\0\0|\0\0\0L\4\5\0\1\0\0\0"..., 8988, MSG_PEEK|MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, [12]) = 36
23650 recvfrom(10, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\1\0\0\0b\\\0\0\0\0\0\0|\0\0\0L\4\5\0\1\0\0\0"..., 8988, MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, [12]) = 36
23650 close(10)                         = 0
23650 write(2, "Sorry, try again.\n", 18) = 18
23650 gettimeofday({1420050850, 238344}, NULL) = 0
23650 socket(PF_FILE, SOCK_STREAM, 0)   = 10
23650 connect(10, {sa_family=AF_FILE, path="/var/run/dbus/system_bus_socket"}, 33) = 0


6625  select(8, [5 7], [], NULL, NULL)  = ? ERESTARTNOHAND (To be restarted)
6625  --- SIGCHLD (Child exited) @ 0 (0) ---
6625  write(8, "\21", 1)                = 1
6625  rt_sigreturn(0x8)                 = -1 EINTR (Interrupted system call)
6625  select(8, [5 7], [], NULL, NULL)  = 1 (in [7])
6625  read(7, "\21", 1)                 = 1
6625  wait4(6636, [{WIFEXITED(s) && WEXITSTATUS(s) == 0}], WNOHANG|WSTOPPED, NULL) = 6636
6625  rt_sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, NULL, [], 8) = 0
6625  socket(PF_NETLINK, SOCK_RAW, 9)   = 6
6625  fcntl(6, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC)     = 0
6625  readlink("/proc/self/exe", "/usr/bin/sudo", 4096) = 13
6625  sendto(6, "x\0\0\0R\4\5\0\6\0\0\0\0\0\0\0op=PAM:session_c"..., 120, 0, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, 12) = 120
6625  poll([{fd=6, events=POLLIN}], 1, 500) = 1 ([{fd=6, revents=POLLIN}])
6625  recvfrom(6, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\6\0\0\0\330\355\377\377\0\0\0\0x\0\0\0R\4\5\0\6\0\0\0"..., 8988, MSG_PEEK|MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, [12]) = 36
6625  recvfrom(6, "$\0\0\0\2\0\0\0\6\0\0\0\330\355\377\377\0\0\0\0x\0\0\0R\4\5\0\6\0\0\0"..., 8988, MSG_DONTWAIT, {sa_family=AF_NETLINK, pid=0, groups=00000000}, [12]) = 36
6625  close(6)                          = 0
6625  open("/etc/security/pam_env.conf", O_RDONLY) = 6
6625  fstat(6, {st_dev=makedev(253, 1), st_ino=521434, st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_nlink=1, st_uid=0, st_gid=0, st_blksize=4096, st_blocks=8, st_size=2980, st_atime=2014/12/31-16:10:01, st_mtime=2012/10/15-08:23:52, st_ctime=2014/06/16-15:45:35}) = 0
6625  mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 0x7fbc3a59a000
6625  read(6, "#\n# This is the configuration fi"..., 4096) = 2980
6625  read(6, "", 4096)                 = 0
6625  close(6)                          = 0
6625  munmap(0x7fbc3a59a000, 4096)      = 0
6625  open("/etc/environment", O_RDONLY) = 6

My Guess

Server1 isn't getting the password properly or is incorrectly asking/waiting for a password. This doesn't look like a Sudo or Ansible problem (alone, they both work just fine), but Server1 doesn't seem to receive the credentials (or adhere to them) in a similar fashion as Server2. Server1 & 2 serve different purposes, so it's possible that they have some authentication or package version differences, but they were both built from the same repository; therefore, they shouldn't be THAT different.

PAM Auth

I thought maybe the systems had different PAM configurations causing the passwords to be handled a bit differently. I compared the /etc/pam.d/ files (using md5sum [file]), and they are the same between the two systems.



Tested another issue where sudo wouldn't read a password from STDIN, but that worked fine on both servers.

Test Sudo Ad-Hoc

-bash-4.1$ ansible Server1 -m file -a "dest=/tmp/ansible_test.txt state=touch" -sK
SSH password: 
sudo password [defaults to SSH password]: 
Server1 | success >> {
    "changed": true, 
    "dest": "/tmp/ansible_test.txt", 
    "gid": 0, 
    "group": "root", 
    "mode": "0644", 
    "owner": "root", 
    "size": 0, 
    "state": "file", 
    "uid": 0

Success! But why?!


  1. Server1 seems to be waiting on sudo password prompt while Server2 runs just fine.
  2. Running ansible "ad-hoc" on Server1 works fine. Running it as a playbook fails.


  • What could cause my Ansible Sudo configuration to work fine on one server and be rejected on another?
  • Does Ansible perform the password "pass" from local to remote machine differently when run ad-hoc versus playbook? I assumed they would be the same.

I'm thinking this is getting close to simply submitting a bug report to the GitHub page purely on the fact that sudo access has different results depending if I'm running ad-hoc or not.

2 Answers 2


What I would do is to use

strace -vfp `pidof sshd`

and see where it's failing.

Check the account as well, maybe it's restricted or something but my bet is that something is wrong with your /etc/hosts file or it does get changed in the process.

  • Thanks, lulian. I've applied a few edits to the question, one section being STrace output. It's clear that there's a difference between the two servers in how they proceed after the ansible process kicks off on the remote server. Subsequent runs and trace captures were consistent.
    – BrM13
    Jan 2, 2015 at 18:29
  • I think you need more from that strace -vfp, do it manually on the top sshd process and follow through the output. I don't think after reading the password it's just closing the channel like that before going through PAM etc. At that point please take a look on the sshd_config file and hosts.deny .. see if you can find something there.
    – Iulian
    Jan 5, 2015 at 2:23
  • I had tried your suggestion before, but I must have missed the crucial element in there (hence why I opted to watch the ansible process in the initial STrace). After another go, I found an empty {{ password }} variable being passed instead of the real password. Opted to submit another "Answer" separately since your answer eventually got me on the right track.
    – BrM13
    Jan 5, 2015 at 14:23

Using @lulian as a foothold in this answer, the problem came down to a rogue ansible_sudo_pass: defined in the group_vars which was overriding the password entered for --ask-sudo-pass.

Using the following:

while [[ -z $(ps -eaf|grep 'sshd: [U]ser1@pts/1') ]]; do
strace -ff -vfp $(ps -eaf|grep 'sshd: [U]ser1@pts/1'|awk '{print $2}') -o /root/strace_sshd1_2.out

I was able to find that write(4, "{{ password }}\n", 15) was being passed instead of the entered password. After some quick searching, I did indeed find ansible_sudo_pass defined in my group_vars which was overriding my entered password.

As an FYI to everyone else, the ansible_sudo_pass: definition seems to take precedence over --ask-sudo-pass which, at first, seemed counter-intuitive. In the end, this is user error, but @lulian's methodology in debugging the SSH interaction as well as the relationship discovery between ansible_sudo_pass and --ask-sudo-pass should be very helpful for others out there. (Hopefully!)

  • 1
    I would argue that Ansible giving precedence to file-defined variables over command line options is counter-intuitive, and bad behavior. Curiously, it does recognize that this is broken when you pass options with -e, and you may be able to work around this by passing an appropriate option with -e. Jul 24, 2015 at 17:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.