Subject: Re: PAM
To: None <email@example.com>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: 09/25/2002 16:54:04
>> (1) This is not a question of how to authenticate; it's a question
>> of what to do once authenticated.
> This was an example of a reason why you need [dynamic objects in
Rather, of why someone who refuses to consider other ways of addressing
the underlying problems needs them. (Okay, that's excessively
restrictive. Why someone who refuses to *use* other ways, etc.)
>> (2) It's also fairly easy to fix; the simplest change that comes to
>> mind is to have the magic syscalls affect the parent of the
>> calling process rather than the calling process itself. [...]
> See the "But I live in the real world" comment previously.
So what's your point? What's non-real-world about this?
It means a slight change to your existing AFS code, yes. So does
_anything_ that isn't out-of-the-box AFS, and if you insist on
restricting yourself to that, why are you even chipping in on a
discussion about possible better ways to do things?
>> (4) At worst, you will just have to use older methods, less
>> convenient and/or less secure, when using AFS.
> Methods that don't work, you mean.
No. If I'd meant that, I'd have said that.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML firstname.lastname@example.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B