Date: Mon, 11 Mar 1996 07:00:39 +0000 (GMT) From: Adam David <adam@veda.is> To: mark@grondar.za (Mark Murray) Cc: mark@grondar.za, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP! Please check... Message-ID: <199603110700.HAA01428@veda.is> In-Reply-To: <199603110643.IAA02287@grumble.grondar.za> from Mark Murray at "Mar 11, 96 08:43:29 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > is this considered a security feature, to require non-kerberos handling > > to be explicitly requested?... (I will rephrase to ask what I meant to...) > > but in that case why did the previous version ask for the password twice > > at all? If this is a security feature, why allow the password to be offered to both kerberos and "normal" authentication at all, without requiring the user to specify which one? (of course, the default depends on whether kerberos exists). Sorry, I probably missed something really obvious here. -- Adam David <adam@veda.is>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603110700.HAA01428>