What is the value of channel bindings if either side(client and/or server) can ignore it by setting it to GSS_C_NO_CHANNEL_BINDINGS ? It seems to me a useless functionality or do you have an example where it can be used ?
Thanks Markus "Sam Hartman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> "Markus" == Markus Moeller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Markus> I noticed that from MIT version 1.2.4 to 1.3.1 the > Markus> gss_accept_sec_context call has changed in ftpd.c. It is > Markus> now set to use always GSS_C_NO_CHANNEL_BINDINGS. I also > Markus> noticed that changing the channel bindings in > Markus> gss_init_sec_context on the client doesn't create an error > Markus> I would expect. > > MIT assumes that null channel bindings on the server means that any > channel bindings are acceptable to that server, including null. > draft-ietf-krb-wg-gssapi-cfx-xx.txt allows this and has been approved for publication by the IESG. > > > Markus> I also see a different behaviour in my proftpd mod_gss > Markus> module. If the client uses gss_init_sec_context with > Markus> GSS_C_NO_CHANNEL_BINDINGS, the channel bindings settings > Markus> in gss_accept_sec_context on the server are ignored (e.g > Markus> if the server uses channel bindings with application data > Markus> set and the client used GSS_C_NO_CHANNEL_BINDINGS the > Markus> client can login) > > > It seems to be the way the code is written. I'm not sure it is to > spec or a good idea. > > ________________________________________________ > Kerberos mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos > ________________________________________________ Kerberos mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
