Re: Design Considerations for New Authentication Methods

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
Subject: Re: Design Considerations for New Authentication Methods
Date: 2006-11-03 16:27:36
Message-ID: 454B6DF8.40602@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>> To be honest, I have often wondered *why* we support kerberos
>> outside of the uber l33t geek factor. I have not once in a
>> commercial deployment had a business requirement for the
>> beast. LDAP? Now that is a whole other issue :)
>
> Single sign-on in a Windows/AD environment (I'm talking clients on
> windows, servers on linux here - at least in my case). I know several
> people who use it, most just don't post here ;-)

Wouldn't the LDAP auth in 8.2 resolve that?

>
> Now, it would likely be a lot *easier* to do this with GSSAPI than the
> pure kerberos stuff we have now, given that the Windows native APIs
> support GSSAPI compatible stuff, but not the stuff we have now.

Nod.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

>
> //Magnus
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-11-03 16:34:16 Re: [HACKERS] Bug in WAL backup documentation
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-11-03 16:25:09 Re: Bug in WAL backup documentation