2010/6/11 Phillip Moore <[email protected]>:
>
> Well, AD *is* Kerberos, but it's another matter entirely to manage the
> configuration of Kerberos on the UNIX clients.  If someone doesn't have
> support for it today, adding it is non-trivial.
> OTOH, it isn't that hard, once you understand how the peices fit together.
>  Certainly, being able to help clients leverage this is a valuable service
> to offer.

Yes, and a former employer (as well as other companies) offers such services.

Looking at the experience of AFS, though, I think that requiring
Kerberos has been a significant barrier to adoption. EFS should not
require Kerberos in all cases, however -- using the same security
model as the underlying network filesystem is very understandable to
new adopters, so ...

NFSv2/3 - use uids and -trust- the client
NFSv4 - use whatever model (uids, GSSAPI..)
AFS - whatever model (Kerberos right now, but others are in the works)

And, yes, password caching is bad.  Trusting the client is arguably
worse, but at least trusting the client is what a site is currently
doing.

Steven
_______________________________________________
EFS-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.openefs.org/mailman/listinfo/efs-dev

Reply via email to