Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 20:41:27 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 277650] Remove supporting linking against Heimdal from base (GSSAPI_BASE) Message-ID: <bug-277650-7788-4CWXdMD2vO@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-277650-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-277650-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D277650 --- Comment #13 from Siva Mahadevan <me@svmhdvn.name> --- (In reply to Michael Osipov from comment #12) I still feel that this is a vague argument in favour of keeping it in base.= For users that desire a kerberized sshd, here are the advantages of relying on openssh-portable from ports in my eyes: * users can simply 'pkg upgrade' to immediately get security and feature upgrades to openssh and kerberos at the cadence that they wish * sshd in base will potentially have a smaller attack surface if GSSAPI is disabled * Both currently-supported providers of kerberos are up-to-date in ports, a= long with their -devel counterparts for those who wish to use bleeding-edge providers. This is a big one, since Heimdal has been stuck on 7.8.0 for qui= te some time, but the upstream git project has seen recent active development = and fixes. * The duplication of work for maintainers to update both base and ports kerberos providers is removed * Users can wish to link against port-provided OpenSSL as well The only disadvantage that I can see is that users will not be provided out-of-the-box with a default batteries-included environment that supports kerberized services like sshd or others. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-277650-7788-4CWXdMD2vO>