Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 26 May 2001 14:55:21 -0700
From:      "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org>
To:        Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: PAM, S/Key and authentication schemes.
Message-ID:  <20010526145521.D11876@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <200105251240.f4PCeO612402@gratis.grondar.za>; from mark@grondar.za on Fri, May 25, 2001 at 02:42:40PM %2B0200
References:  <200105251240.f4PCeO612402@gratis.grondar.za>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 02:42:40PM +0200, Mark Murray wrote:
> We currently have a slew of authentication schemes in FreeBSD. There
> is the usual lot in getpwent(3) and friends, OPIE, S/Key and PAM, and

Is there some reason we cannot `cvs rm' S/Key and only use OPIE?  OPIE
was intended as a replacement for S/Key.

> S/Key is OBE in my opinion and needs to be entirely replaced by OPIE.
> (And in the majority of cases pam_opie will do the job).

Do you know why ?ache? did not totally replace S/Key when he imported
OPIE?
 
-- 
-- David  (obrien@FreeBSD.org)

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010526145521.D11876>