Subject: Re: crypt(3)
To: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
From: Herb Peyerl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/15/1994 17:28:01
On Tue, 15 Nov 1994 13:07:53 -0500 email@example.com (Greg A. Woods) wrote:
> > Replacing crypt(3) with MD5, if done properly (i.e., a salt was still
> > there, arbitrary length passwords were now permitted) would be a great
> > boon for everyone, not just those overseas.
> I agree, except for the use of the word "replace", since there's also a
> very strong need for compatability with the standard password scheme too
I don't like having to replace the current scheme with anything nor would I
want to see new-entries be MD5 generated.
Whenever someone wants an account on one of my machines, they ship me a
passwd entry... That way their password can remain the same. And vice
versa. Whenever I get an account on someone else's machine, I ship them
my password entry.
I suppose if it was offered as a choice (ie: in the makefile) and the
default was to read both and generate the current scheme, then I wouldn't
find too much to object about.