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

Re: PPP + RADIUS authentication using PAM



> The problem here is that the poster explicitly stated this needed to work with
> PPP CHAP authentication.  That means that it WON'T work with pam_pwdb,
> pam_unix, pam_kerberos, pam_ntdom, pam_userdb, or any other PAM module that
> backends onto a user database where passwords are stored in encrypted form.  I
> would be surprised if pam_ldap worked at all, and pam_radius_auth will only
> work if talking to a Radius server that supports CHAP -- which rules out most
> of the Radius servers that run under Unix.  And that pretty much takes me to
The point here isn't so much the encrypted password (tho Livingston's Radius
does support CHAP/cleartext passwords) - the point (where I digress from the reply
thread) is that PAM is useful purely as an authentication routing mechanism
*however* it still tends to be a little too OS bound to be a network-only-auth
application (limited only by the current modules which were written for OS-user
environments) and where the PAM API doesn't seem to have room for the extra
session handling.

Don't get me wrong - I think PAM is better than sliced bread ..


> the end of the list of PAM authentication modules that I can think of.  Unless
> you have PHP, MySQL, Apache, Squid, and pppd all configured for PAM and using
> a module /other/ than the above, one which uses a cleartext password database,
> then you don't gain any interoperability at all by introducing PAM into the
> above equation.
> 
> Steve Langasek
> postmodern programmer

 

--
RingBurn.com
"Where there's smoke, there's fire"





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