Am Freitag, 13. Januar 2006 21:37 schrieb ext Jose Gonzalez Gomez:
> BIG WARNING: Don't do this unless you're using simple bind over SSL
> protected connections unless you want your passwords to travel (almost?)
> as clear text through the network.
And because of this, I'd recommend separating au
On Jan 14, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:
thak you all. now I really understand what about PAM and LDAP.
The upshot of all this is.if you have more than 5 computers that
you want to all have the same usernames and passwords, ldap and nis,
etc might be more than you need.
thak you all. now I really understand what about PAM and LDAP.
On 1/13/06, John Jolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Jose Gonzalez Gomez wrote:
> 2006/1/13, John Jolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:45 AM, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:
> >
> > > t
On Jan 13, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Jose Gonzalez Gomez wrote:2006/1/13, John Jolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:45 AM, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:> thanks. I believe I am starting to understand this.>> I was seeing that ldap can authenticate in a lot of types, like ,> databases, files, and
2006/1/13, John Jolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:45 AM, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:> thanks. I believe I am starting to understand this.>> I was seeing that ldap can authenticate in a lot of types, like ,> databases, files, and PAM do some things like that too or am I
> wrong ?>
On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:45 AM, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:
thanks. I believe I am starting to understand this.
I was seeing that ldap can authenticate in a lot of types, like ,
databases, files, and PAM do some things like that too or am I
wrong ?
as far as I know you are wrong. ldap is an
On 13 Jan 2006, at 17:45, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:
thanks. I believe I am starting to understand this.
I was seeing that ldap can authenticate in a lot of types, like ,
databases, files, and PAM do some things like that too or am I
wrong ?
Yes, pretty much. But they're often structured
thanks. I believe I am starting to understand this.
I was seeing that ldap can authenticate in a lot of types, like ,
databases, files, and PAM do some things like that too or am I
wrong ?
On 1/13/06, John Jolet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:03 AM, Allan Spagnol Comar
On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:03 AM, Allan Spagnol Comar wrote:
Hi, I don´t know if this is a valid question, or I am making a big
mess, but I was wondering witch autentication method is better, ldap
or pam. I would like to know too if is possible to use bouth.
ldap is one of the methods that can (p)
Hi, I don´t know if this is a valid question, or I am making a big
mess, but I was wondering witch autentication method is better, ldap
or pam. I would like to know too if is possible to use bouth.
thanks.
--
An application asked:
"Requeires Windows 9x, NT4 or better",
so I´ve installed Linux
--
10 matches
Mail list logo
