What you really want to do is use something like SSL, GSS-API, SASL, raw Kerberos, or anything of that sort which allows you to cryptographically authenticate someone without exposing their secrets (e.g., a password) on the wire. I had wanted to design a generic wrapper API for all those systems atop PAM w/ binary prompts. But that has gone nowhere. Although, the one example of binary prompts included in Linux-PAM is, in fact, a wrapper around a home-grown network authentication system based on shared secrets, so a bare-bones proof of concept exists. Cheers, Nico On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 03:16:58AM +0400, Michael Tokarev wrote: > I remember a big discussion here about binary prompts > with pam, and how that may solve problem with integrating > pam to an applications uses some protocol (like pop or > ftp) that limits pam usage. I still can't understand > what are binary prompts and how them may solve a problem > (can someone enlighten me here?). But I used pop daemon > (written by me) here that implements APOP command using > pam. When APOP is enabled and daemon gets it from > client, it then sets up pam_env with it's random seed > (APOP_SEED=012345), sets up PAM_USER as usual, and > uses apop hash value as PAM_AUTHTOK when requested. > In pop's pam stack, I defined "pam_apop" module as > sufficient (first in a stack) that checks APOP_SEED > variable and verifies supplied hash if variable is > set, returning OK or AUTHFAIL, or returns PAM_IGNORE > if not set. This isn't perfect (pam_apop must be > the first module who asks for an AUTHTOK, for example), > but it works. The question: how this may be done with > binary prompts (if can at all -- note that at least > generation of random seed should be done at pop server > startup -- it should be shown in a first welcome line > server responds to connection attempt)? Note that > APOP is only example here -- think of any other AUTH > in pop/imap, or even STLS/STARTTLS - should that last > one fit with pam also (STARTTLS may provide user's > certificate info)? The question is real: if e.g. > APOP can be done with binary prompts, then there is > no need to introduce other "protocols" around pam > like APOP_SEED environment variable, but I'm afraid > that if I release my pop daemon to public as it is > now, people will start to write pop modules for it > based on wrong "pam protocol". > > Thank you! > > Regards, > Michael. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pam-list@redhat.com > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list -- . Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or related financial instruments.
