From owner-freebsd-current  Sun Feb 25 07:10:27 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id HAA02597
          for current-outgoing; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 07:10:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu (Fieber-John.campusview.indiana.edu [149.159.1.34])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA02592
          for <current@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 07:10:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from jfieber@localhost) by fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id KAA06967; Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:09:45 -0500
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:09:45 -0500 (EST)
From: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>
X-Sender: jfieber@fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu
To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
cc: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>, current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: New Dual-personality crypt 
In-Reply-To: <199602250807.KAA20978@grumble.grondar.za>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960225100630.253G-100000@fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 25 Feb 1996, Mark Murray wrote:

> I have been slowly getting round to putting a option in passwd(1)
> to allow the user to select the encryption algorithm, but I am not

Just a random opinion here, but I think the choice should be up to the 
sysadmin, not the user.  If you choose to make it a user option, then 
give the sysadmin veto power.

-john

== jfieber@indiana.edu ===========================================
== http://fieber-john.campusview.indiana.edu/~jfieber ============