I did use difok to solve the issue. Thanks.

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Jonathan Vaughn <[email protected]>wrote:

> Probably the culprit is specifically pam_cracklib, which among other
> things checks if password are too similar.
>
> http://www.linux-pam.org/Linux-PAM-html/sag-pam_cracklib.html
>
> Looks like you can use the difok=N option to specify how many characters
> need to differ from old one for it not to be "too similar". You could set
> this to 1 or 2 to allow incremental changes at the end, or 0 probably to
> disable entirely.
>
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:10 AM, John Trump <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Agree about password security.  What I provided was just an example of a
>> password.  Unfortunately forcing the use of a non similar is beyond my
>> control. I guess one bright spot is the password being used meets all other
>> complexity requirements,  I just needed to allow subsequent passwords to be
>> similar.
>>  On May 29, 2014 6:08 AM, "Vincent Gerris" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Well I just like to note that you SHOULD NOT want to use a password like
>>> that.
>>> It's completely insecure and thus a very BAD idea from a security
>>> perspective.
>>> As far as I know, you can override a directory wide password policy per
>>> account, so if the restrictions come from there, just change them there,
>>> there is a setting that defines how different a next password should be.
>>> If it come from a module in between with similar rules and if you really
>>> want to do this, you should also modify it there.
>>> If the module correctly handles LDAP responses regarding password
>>> policies, then you should be able to disable the checks there.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:06 PM, John Trump <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The issue was being caused by the pam module on the linux systems. Not
>>>> sure why I have to modify pam module to allow similar paswords when
>>>> changing ldap passwords.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Mark Reynolds <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 05/28/2014 04:21 PM, John Trump wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not using any other client app. User logged on to a linux system and
>>>>> trying to change password. If they choose a password to similar to the old
>>>>> one it will not allow it.
>>>>>
>>>>> How are you changing the password, are you using ldapmodify?  Can you
>>>>> post access log(/var/log/dirsrv/slapd-INSTANCE/access) output showing the
>>>>> failed password attempt?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Mark Reynolds <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 05/28/2014 04:06 PM, John Trump wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Haven't been able to come up with a solution yet. Hopefully someone
>>>>>> on the list has a suggestion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 12:42 PM, John Trump <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would like to relax the password policy for specific users to
>>>>>>> allow them to modify passwords but use similar password to their old 
>>>>>>> one.
>>>>>>> These are "group" accounts and would like to allow password to be set 
>>>>>>> to:
>>>>>>> password01 then allow password to be changed to password02. Currently 
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> is not allowed. I understand security risk etc in allowing this. I do 
>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>> to keep other password complexity and history settings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Suggestions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>    I'm not aware of a setting in 389 that prohibits you from using
>>>>>> secret01, then secret02, and then secret03, etc.  These should all be
>>>>>> allowed.  Are you using some other client app(freeIPA?) to make these
>>>>>> password updates?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 389 users mailing 
>>>>>> [email protected]https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 389 users mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 389 users mailing 
>>>>> [email protected]https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 389 users mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 389 users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 389 users mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>>
>>
>> --
>> 389 users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>>
>
>
> --
> 389 users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
>
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users

Reply via email to