krbdev Digest, Vol 221, Issue 2

[manoj kumar mishra]

Can someone tell where to look for solution?

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 9:30 PM, krbdev-***@mit.edu<krbdev-***@mit.edu> wrote: Send krbdev mailing list submissions to
    ***@mit.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    krbdev-***@mit.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
    krbdev-***@mit.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of krbdev digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Issues with multiple pkinit KDC certauth plugins (Greg Hudson)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 12:29:04 -0400
From: Greg Hudson <***@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Issues with multiple pkinit KDC certauth plugins
To: Ken Hornstein <***@cmf.nrl.navy.mil>, <***@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <bda13157-88e8-6a5c-1279-***@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

It occurs to me that the simplest solution here would be to
add an additional return code that meant "pass + add hwauth to
ticket".  Like it could be called KRB5_CERTAUTH_HWAUTH_PASS.  Or
KRB5_CERTAUTH_HWAUTH_NO_HANDLE, or something else.

In hindsight, adding a new method would probably have been cleaner, so
that we could ask "does this cert indicate the use of hardware"
independently of "does this cert authorize this principal".

However, since we're halfway in on shoehorning both questions into one
method, I guess it's no less clean at this point to add another entry in
the answer matrix.  So, this is fine.


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list
***@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev


End of krbdev Digest, Vol 221, Issue 2
**************************************

_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list ***@mit.edu