From owner-freebsd-security Sat Jul 29 15:14:20 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA9B37B621; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:14:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id PAA61690; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:14:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:14:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Mike Tancsa Cc: security@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: CDSA ? In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20000729021637.03da10c0@mail.sentex.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Mike Tancsa wrote: > At 11:14 PM 7/28/2000 -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Mike Tancsa wrote: > > > > > Anyone take a look at this ? Supposedly coming to LINUX by the end of > > > August as open source ( http://developer.intel.com/ial/security/faq.htm > > for > > > more info.) I guess it kinda reminds me of PAM, but much more > > > comprehensive... From the FAQ, > > > >Give them a few years to work out all of the security vulnerabilities :-) > > No doubt. But are there any security initiatives similar to this one out > there already ? GSSAPI sounds similar in concept, but I don't know about coverage. It will be interesting to see what license they choose for the reference implementation: if they care about getting this adopted as a defacto standard they'd be stupid to GPL it :-) Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message