| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dallas N Antley <dna+pgsql(at)clas(dot)ufl(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 7.4.3 and PAM authentication failures |
| Date: | 2004-08-16 23:35:44 |
| Message-ID: | 18655.1092699344@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Dallas N Antley <dna+pgsql(at)clas(dot)ufl(dot)edu> writes:
> I think I know why pam authentication fails with the pam_unix*
> modules, but would appreciate your opinion.
I think you've proven that the particular PAM modules you are testing
with are useless for programs executing as non-root, but that doesn't
mean the entire concept is broken. Look around ... there are lots of
PAM modules (or at least that's the theory).
BTW, what are those "door_info()" and "door_call()" calls shown in the
truss output? Could it be that those are supposed to get the PAM code
into a higher authorization level?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dallas N Antley | 2004-08-17 02:06:49 | Re: 7.4.3 and PAM authentication failures |
| Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2004-08-16 22:52:42 | Re: [ADMIN] Pseudo-Off-topic-survey: Opinions about future of Postgresql(MySQL)? |