On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Curt Lundgren wrote:
> Really, I'd rather not be involved in a flamefest - John's original reply
> was not uncalled for. I could have been more complete in my first message -
> so blame me if you like.
>
> I'm not sure if PAM is going to work, since the only way th
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Steven S. Critchfield
wrote:
> - "Michael Chaney" wrote:
>> John, may I suggest decaf for a week?
>
> Not beating the dead horse, but it I'm sure this comes from the presentation
> Randal Schwartz gave some time back about his encounter at Intel over a
> secu
ec 2009 16:32:05
To:
Subject: Re: [nlug] Testing Linux user authentication with no shell
- "Michael Chaney" wrote:
> John, may I suggest decaf for a week?
Not beating the dead horse, but it I'm sure this comes from the presentation
Randal Schwartz gave some time ba
- "Michael Chaney" wrote:
> John, may I suggest decaf for a week?
Not beating the dead horse, but it I'm sure this comes from the presentation
Randal Schwartz gave some time back about his encounter at Intel over a
security audit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randal_L._Schwartz
--
Steven
http://search.cpan.org/~gbarr/perl-ldap/lib/Net/LDAP/Extension/SetPassword.p
m
Bill
From: Curt Lundgren [mailto:verif...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 4:21 PM
To: nlug-talk@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [nlug] Testing Linux user authentication with no shell
Really, I&#
Really, I'd rather not be involved in a flamefest - John's original reply
was not uncalled for. I could have been more complete in my first message -
so blame me if you like.
I'm not sure if PAM is going to work, since the only way these users are
known to the system is via LDAP (I've never mixed
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:21 PM, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> If I understand your question correctly, you are looking for something that
> can be used to test whether or not a given password is valid for a given
> account, and you don't want to actually attempt to log in. Forgive me if I
> am mis
On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 03:57:18PM -0600, Curt Lundgren wrote:
> Right, and that seems to be the direction I'll head in. User password
> authentication on this particular system is via LDAP and I'm learning enough
> about it that I can probably take that route. I was hoping for an "already
> buil
*Date: *Mon, 7 Dec 2009 15:44:00 -0600
> *To: *
> *Subject: *Re: [nlug] Testing Linux user authentication with no shell
>
> Thanks, John - but what I'm trying to do is determine whether the user has
> entered the right password - and since they don't have shells, I need
>
ht to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
-Original Message-
From: Curt Lundgren
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 15:44:00
To:
Subject: Re: [nlug] Testing Linux user authentication with no shell
Thanks, John - but what I'm
wrongly is better than not
> to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Curt Lundgren
> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 12:47:36
> To: NLUG
> Subject: [nlug] Testing Linux user authentication with no shell
>
> We have a large number of users on
e.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to
think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
-Original Message-
From: Curt Lundgren
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 12:47:36
To: NLUG
Subject: [nlug] Testing Linux user authentication with no shell
We have a
We have a large number of users on a SuSE Linux server without shell
access. I'm looking for a way to test whether a plaintext password is
valid or not. I thought I could use "login" and do something based on
the way it fails (bad password vs. no login shell) but that's not
working for me.
Does
13 matches
Mail list logo
