* Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > --On Wednesday, January 1, 2003 7:21 PM +0100 Andr� Malo > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> - do some magic, i.e. if AuthType digest then use "$user" and >> "$user:$realm" as lookup key (in which order?) >> >> - make it configurable (additional argument to AuthDBMGroupFile?) >> >> - consider a provider mechanism for authorization modules, too? >> >> My favourites are the second or third option :) >> better ideas? > > I would probably implement choice one for now. ($user:$realm first, > then $user.)
ok. then I'm doing so. > Note that I always planned on adding a provider mechanism for > authorization modules, but somehow got sidetracked on that. But, > yeah, that should definitely happen, too. =) I'm not quite sure where this should happen. Core management or a new module mod_authz? > (Choice 2 doesn't make > a whole lot of sense to me.) hmm, the user should know best, what his groupfile contains. But this may be a wrong assumption ;-) Another point: mod_authn_default.c, mod_authz_dbm.c, mod_authz_default.c, mod_authz_groupfile.c and mod_authz_user.c all point to ap_note_basic_auth_failure. I think, now it's time to let them call ap_note_auth_failure directly - right? nd -- die (eval q-qq[Just Another Perl Hacker ] ;-) # Andr� Malo, <http://www.perlig.de/> #
