PAM in lsb?
bastian at ens.ascom.ch
Fri May 28 08:39:48 PDT 1999
Joseph Malicki wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Stuart Anderson wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 May 1999, Burchard Steinbild wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > what do you think about PAM? Should this be part of an LSB system?
> > Is it's functionallity hidden behind an existing API?
> > Are any apps using a PAM specific API?
> > If the anwers are Yes, No, then I'd be inclined to not specify it.
PAM is definitly the right way to go as it offers an
authentication API to applications independent of the
actual authentication methods in effect on a system.
It offers advantages to the application writer because
he/she now doesn't have to support plain-passwords/shadow-
passwords/NIS/whatever but can just implement PAM. Even
if new authentication methods come along the application
can remain as is.
It offers advantages to the system administrator because
he/she can now make changes to the authentication methods
without needing to recompile each and every application
which needs authentication. Something which is simply
impossible if one of these applications is a closed source
In my opinion PAM is The Right Way to go and I would very
much like to see it included in the lsb.
KDE Core Developer
bastian at kde.org
KDE, Making The Future of Computing Available Today http://www.kde.org
More information about the lsb-discuss