[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: R: Do not use stock RedHat 6.0 kernels with SMBFS! [OFF-TOPIC]
On Thu, 10 Jun 1999, Michael H. Warfield wrote:

> A. Wik enscribed thusly:
> > "Michael H. Warfield" <> wrote:
> > > > (if you call share passwords security at all), they passwords are not
> > > encrypted,
> > Neither are telnet and FTP passwords. Besides, unless public-key
> I use neither... I use SSH and do not allow unencrypted access
> to interactive connections.

SSH is great, but unfortunately, not always installed.

> > cryptography is used, passwords have to be stored in plain-text (or
> > another sensitive format) on disk if they are to be encrypted on the
> > network.
> Not true at all...
> challenge response system for the client to prove that it knows the hashes
> without revealing them. In theory, if you broke into the server and stole
> the hashes, you could create a fake client who could then fake out the
> server, but you already own the server from having broken into it. You do
> not have to store passwords in clear, or in any reversible format anywhere.

No, but the hash file is still more sensitive than a shadow file.

SMB password encryption in it's current form just doesn't seem (to me)
worth the trouble of keeping a separate password database, incompatible
with anything else.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.114 / U:1.084 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site