On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Matt Ingenthron <[email protected]> wrote: > Aaron Stone wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:48 AM, pub crawler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> > > (snip...) >>> >>> Needless to say, permissions and authentication is a feature set that >>> is going to re-requested for addition now and in the future. It opens >>> the door for someone to create a memcached variation with such a >>> feature set - anyone? >>> >> >> Please don't. Please nobody even think of doing that. Really. Don't. >> >> > > Authentication, at least, has been in the community memcached release for > the last two micro releases: > http://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/ReleaseNotes143
It's a reasonable effort at keeping someone from writing to your cache. Surely they can still sniff the network to get your data. memcached with encryption is like a Ferrari with monster truck tires. > If you need security labels and such, running separate processes would seem > to be the way to go. Of course, security labels can also be applied to > network traffic, meaning that the authentication features are redundant. :) > > - Matt >
