[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marek Michalkiewicz) wrote on 31.01.96 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I know some people don't like shadow passwords. Others (like me) don't like > non-shadow passwords :-). The best way to keep everyone happy is to make > them optional and let the user decide... Personally, I think the ideal solution to this will be PAM, which is currently in the process of getting implemented for Linux. This will allow you to have a config file where you specify just what sort of password handling (/etc/passwd, /etc/shadow, yp, Kerberos, S/key, Bruce's MD5, .rhost, what have you) you want to use with what program, without any need to recompile your programs once they know about PAM - just add another PAM module to handle your new scheme. I have no idea how long the implementation will take, of course; but what I've seen from it looks good so far. And it's not Linux-only - it seems to have OSF origins. I feel it's high time to get a unified way to do this, and I think PAM will be that unified way. References: http://www.pilgrim.umass.edu/pub/osf_dce/RFC/rfc86.0.txt Mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ask Theodore Ts'o ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). MfG Kai
