On Mon, Dec 08, 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> I thought pam was a good authentication method used by lots of distros as standard.
> It seams to me that OpenPKG prefers to default there packages to not support PAM.
> Is there a known reason for that choice ?
> 
Alex,
I don't have a complete list, but I'm aware of some issues.

To support PAM, OpenPKG has to penetrate host system much deeper as we
would like it to do. This in contradiction to the OpenPKG philosophy of
the least possible host tangency. We left the decision to the user and
made PAM support optional.

Managing installation, configuration and removal of PAM applications
is somewhat painful as two incompatible configuration methologies
exist: one large config /etc/pam.conf file for all applications vs.
one dircetory /etc/pam.d with one file for every application. We tried
to abstract this mess using functionality provided by a separate "pam"
package.

Also PAM in general is often only a partly solution for real
world applications. It is what the abbreviation says, "pluggable
authentication module", not more. You can use it to authenticate
existing users but the existence of the users must be provided by a
separate solution, i.e. NIS/YP for Unix "shell" accounts, which needs
additional setup. If you think nsswitch comes to the rescue, you're
wrong. Unlike PAM, it lacks support for a standardized API, some OS like
FreeBSD 4.x do not support it at all for good reason.

A better approach would be an application natively using LDAP. But as
there are alternatives like /etc/passwd, NIS, NIS+, RADIUS, TACACS to
name a few, any attempt will likely end up in huge application rewriting
or limited support for identity management. But any native solution
renders PAM useless.

PAM is also a system wide solution which is again in contradiction to
a OpenPKG philosophy, namely the independence of OpenPKG from the host
system and from a OpenPKG instance to other OpenPKG instances.

Last but not least, PAM adds additional critical code pathes to
applications which are favored targets of security "inspection", see
"remote root exploit in openssh" [1] and "information leakage in
openssh" [2].

Having all that said I want you to know we understand there is a
need for PAM especially in enterprise installations that require
cross-platform identity management. So we do and continue to support
PAM. Just not by default.

[1] http://www.openpkg.org/security/OpenPKG-SA-2003.042-openssh.html
[2] http://www.openpkg.org/security/OpenPKG-SA-2003.035-openssh.html

--
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Cable & Wireless
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project                                    www.openpkg.org
User Communication List                      [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to