dynamic /bin /sbin

[Robert Garrett]

Hiten Pandya wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 27, 2003 at 11:04:11AM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>> 
>> ::If the latter: each autentication mechanism is supplied by a
>> ::dynamically-linked "plug-in". Getting an nscd or lookupd to partition -
>> ::ie, sandbox - unstable plugins is a bit more work, but still doable.
>> ::
>> ::The point about libc containing a "fallback" mechanism is precisely so
>> ::that a failure of lookupd won't leave the box _completely_ dead in the
>> ::water.
>> ::
>> ::--
>> ::jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/
>> :
>> :    I would say we definitely want to keep a fallback mechanism in
>> :    libc... a simple spwd (e.g. master.passwd) mechanism ought to be
>> :    sufficient.
>> :
>> :    I really hate the idea of using dynamically linked plug-ins for
>> :    authentication, at least when used with standard applications.
>> :    I think it's disaster waiting to happen.  It might be reasonable
>> :    to use plug-ins for a port service based authentication daemon
>> :    since that is a far more controlled situation.
>> 
>>     I'm going to expand on this a bit.. the reason I think authentication
>>     plug-ins are a disaster for standard applications is because it
>>     creates
>>     a weak link within the application itself.  If you have numerous
>>     authentication mechanisms one bug could put all of your applications
>>     (and the environments they run in, some of which might be encrypted
>>     secure) at risk.
> 
> Are we still planning to keep PAM in the base system?
> 
> IMHO, we should move out things that are big and unmaintainable
> into something like the ports/packages system.  This way, they
> can be externally managed if possible.  Also, maybe at a later
> stage in this project's history, a lib-freebsd-compat library
> can be supplied for making things like OpenPAM work..
> 
> If that is possible, this is just off the top of my head. :-)
> 
> Cheers.
> 
Not until we have somthing to replace it with :)

Rob