Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 3 Jun 1996 16:35:08 +0200 (MET DST)
From:      "Mikael Karpberg" <karpen@sea.campus.luth.se>
To:        freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: MD5 Crack code
Message-ID:  <199606031435.QAA06701@sea.campus.luth.se>
In-Reply-To: <199606031210.IAA01617@selway.i.com> from "Will Brown" at Jun 3, 96 08:10:04 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi.

> Trying (and hopefully failing) to Crack passwords is onne thing.  An
> altogether other thing is cleartext passwords flying around on the
> net. IMHO that is the largest single risk to systems that are not
> firewalled.

Agreed, but some passwords that users use could easilly make you shiver
for days... ;)

> Personally I'd love to insist on Skey (or something like it). Seems to
> me that simply building clients (FTP, telnet, MUA's, etc.) that are
> "Skey aware" would go a long way. A separate Skey calculator is a
> level of "complexity" that many naive users seem to balk at.

I'm not aware of how Skey works, I must say. Doesn't it require you to
remember one time passwords or something? Seems like a hassle. Please
feel free to correct me, since I'm surely a novice when it comes to that. :)

> SecurID (for example) may be "better" because it is "two factor"
> but it seems like they are using that to justify a system that is far
> more complex than is required (backend relational databases, etc. etc.)

Never heard of. Short description of what it is?

> Anybody know of work going on in this direction? In particular,
> cross-platform SKey aware clients?

Why not simply something like SSL which is being developed and used a lot
just because the WWW is growing with enormous speed? If you have a secure
link, there is no need for a lot of hassle. You can send anything over the
socket and it'll be safe. Umm.. No?

   /Mikael



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606031435.QAA06701>