Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 20:57:03 +0200 From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PAM, S/Key and authentication schemes. Message-ID: <200105281854.f4SIsh649433@gratis.grondar.za> In-Reply-To: <20010526145521.D11876@dragon.nuxi.com> ; from "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> "Sat, 26 May 2001 14:55:21 MST." References: <20010526145521.D11876@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 02:42:40PM +0200, Mark Murray wrote: > > We currently have a slew of authentication schemes in FreeBSD. There > > is the usual lot in getpwent(3) and friends, OPIE, S/Key and PAM, and > > Is there some reason we cannot `cvs rm' S/Key and only use OPIE? OPIE > was intended as a replacement for S/Key. I want to do this. > > S/Key is OBE in my opinion and needs to be entirely replaced by OPIE. > > (And in the majority of cases pam_opie will do the job). > > Do you know why ?ache? did not totally replace S/Key when he imported > OPIE? It was PST IIRC, and it looked like he was starting to get busy with Juniper. M -- Mark Murray Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200105281854.f4SIsh649433>