Is this a reasonable approach?

[Andy Armstrong]

Tomas Mraz wrote:

>>I guess there might be something that could be done with the 'new' 
>>config syntax that replaces required / requisite / sufficient / optional 
>>with [value1=action1 value2=action2 ...] but I haven't taken the time to 
>>experiment with it yet.
> 
> But you would have to call the pam_abl module in the auth phase twice
> anyway so it wouldn't be much difference from calling it in account or
> session phase. And it would be even more difficult to configure right.

Yes, that's right.

> There is no Licence in your tarball, under what licence do you release
> the module source?

Oh, whatever the rest of PAM is released under. I'll copy the PAM 
licence if that's OK.

-- 
Andy Armstrong