Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 19:15:36 +0300 From: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: mark@grondar.za, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Step6, corresponding /etc/pam.d/* fixes for review Message-ID: <20020121161534.GE37234@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <xzpbsfnwvfz.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> References: <20020121142038.GA36519@nagual.pp.ru> <xzpsn8zwwey.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20020121154244.GC37234@nagual.pp.ru> <xzpbsfnwvfz.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 16:54:56 +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > Ah, I thought pam_opie(8) ignored users that didn't have OPIE set up. In fact, there is no consensus about that among standalone OPIE applications, some acts with fake prompts, some - without. One (among others) argument _for_ "no fake prompts" is that standalone application once compiled with OPIE support can't dynamically turn off fake prompts using some configuration. For PAM case it means that pam_opie can't be always turned on without confusion just because its fake prompts and _nothing_else_. The arguments _against_ "no fake prompts" was explained by markm in our previous discussion. > > I have idea to solve it adding "no_fake_prompts" option to pam_opie to > > control that per admin choice. > > Yep, excellent idea. I'll get right on it. Ok, I'll make patch for review. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020121161534.GE37234>