On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 21:07 +, Ron Jacobs wrote:
> I must say that I hadn't wanted to say anything negative about that code
> in my original post(s), but now that you've asked:
>
> The code now in your 4.1 distribution appears to be minimally (if at
> all) unchanged from some code that I came
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Ron Jacobs
wrote:
> I am not saying that anything doesn't work. I am saying that I have
> looked at the code and see multiple problems based upon my reading of
> the NTLM specification that was first publicly released by Microsoft in
> March of 2007.
>
Fair enough
leg Kalnichevski [mailto:ol...@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 12:23 PM
> To: HttpClient User Discussion
> Subject: Re: Full NTLMv2 Support Achieved Easily (Was: NTLM authentication
> with a UPN instead of domain and user name)
>
> ...
>
> PS: Would you be by any
apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 12:23 PM
> To: HttpClient User Discussion
> Subject: Re: Full NTLMv2 Support Achieved Easily (Was: NTLM authentication
> with a UPN instead of domain and user name)
>
> ...
>
> PS: Would you be by any change wil
close to JCIFS.
I truly hope that I have offended no one.
-Original Message-
From: Oleg Kalnichevski [mailto:ol...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 12:23 PM
To: HttpClient User Discussion
Subject: Re: Full NTLMv2 Support Achieved Easily (Was: NTLM authentication with
a UPN i
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 17:12 +, Ron Jacobs wrote:
> (I apologize for the delay in posting this update. It was delayed due to
> matters outside of my control. Nonetheless, I am sure that anyone
> struggling to gain NTLMv2 support with version 4.1.x will be helped by
> taking a look at the followi
t instance.
-Original Message-
From: Oleg Kalnichevski [mailto:ol...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, March 11, 2011 10:07 AM
To: HttpClient User Discussion
Subject: Re: NTLM authentication with a UPN instead of domain and user name
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 17:47 +, Ron Jacobs wrote:
> I am usin
On Fri, 2011-03-11 at 17:47 +, Ron Jacobs wrote:
> I am using NTLM authentication and I find that when porting from 3.0.2
> to 4.1, I have several questions:
>
> 1) Authenticating with domain and user works but with a UPN (like
>"user@domain.local") authentication fails although both authe
I am using NTLM authentication and I find that when porting from 3.0.2
to 4.1, I have several questions:
1) Authenticating with domain and user works but with a UPN (like
"user@domain.local") authentication fails although both authenticate
fine with my previous 3.0.2 code. Why does the UPN-s
