We accomplish for some applications by assigning a different proxy to each and 
then control in LDAP who the proxy can see. This should work when you can't 
control the logic used by the application itself.

Deborah Crocker, PhD
Systems Engineer III 
Office of Information Technology 
The University of Alabama
Box 870346 
Tuscaloosa, AL 36587 
Office 205-348-3758 | Fax 205-348-9393 
[email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:20 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [389-users] Re: How to Restrict user authentication per application?

Thank you, You are right about one problem. 

However, I believe what you are proposing is not a solution to the problem I'm 
talking about. Just because, in the problem I'm addressing, I can't and it is 
not possible to use your method. 

As I said, the applications we are using are not all of them supporting search 
or group check. So for those which does not support your method, I posted this 
problem. Your solution is not addressing this problem and is for the case which 
application supports those things. 

-
Additionally, to support my idea of ACI on Bind, I think having ACI on Bind 
operation just like others(read,write,...) has many advantages. I could talk 
about many things like improve security. For example think of an environment 
which you want to protect your directory from unwanted access, even "bind", 
based on a policy, time or ip for example.

Please mention that this mechanism is available in some other products, and 
also some vendors have developed policy aware directory or a proxy which adds 
those to the simple directory. (e.g. netiq edirectory or ldap proxy) I mean 
this need / requirement is actual and natural.

_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send 
an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________
389-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to