Re: LibreOffice driver 2: MIT Kerberos vs Microsoft Kerberos

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, lionel(at)mamane(dot)lu
Subject: Re: LibreOffice driver 2: MIT Kerberos vs Microsoft Kerberos
Date: 2011-12-13 22:09:01
Message-ID: 20111213220901.GT24234@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Greg Smith (greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> This answers Lionel's question, but I'm curious for a more user
> impact opinion from you. Given that pgAdmin III has given up on MIT
> KRB5, would you feel doing the same is appropriate for LibreOffice
> too? It sounds like they really shouldn't take on either the build
> cruft or the potential security issues of pulling that in at this
> point.

Yes, I'd encourage LibreOffice to drop MIT "Kerberos for Windows" from
their configure/install of libpq on Windows. It's just too painful and
evil and, today, it might almost be better to just use the built-in
Windows stuff (even on XP with the crappy encryption..) than deal with
the headaches and known security flaws in the ancient MIT KfW build.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Shulgin 2011-12-13 22:45:08 Re: WIP: URI connection string support for libpq
Previous Message Greg Smith 2011-12-13 21:55:14 Re: Configuration include directory