[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Checking already-in-hand passwords

On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Andrew G. Morgan wrote:

> However, my hopes proved to be premature.  On the one hand people like
> to keep using old applications - fixing them up here and there. On the
> other hand writing completely new code takes time that most people can't
> afford. 

Additionally, some protocols just don't offer the functionality and so
often people have no choice. 

> What has happened instead is that people have liked some of the flexibility
> that PAM offers but have shyed away from embracing it all. 

Well, I don't think thats because people don't do it. Its because: 
	1. People don't know about it
	2. Its not properly documented
	3. There are no *easily accessible* examples. Digging through the
	   pamification of wu-ftpd to find out the session hooks is not a
	   viable solution.
	4. Its a new concept not currently or only implicitly implemented
	   in many programs
	5. Lack of time

The first four are good reasons the last one is so widespread. Its simply
too much of an effort to do it right.

Perhaps I am seeing this too negative (my last look at the PAM docs is
several weeks ago) and others didn't have the mentioned problems. If so,
please tell me about it. 

My pamification of cucipop supports APOP. Unfortunately, I pamified and
virtualized the thing at the same time and while my company allows me to
give out the pamification code, they don't want me to give out the
virtualization code and it'll take me some days to seperate that. (Having
been ill for three weeks didn't help either ;-(


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []