Shadow/CrackLib - A compromise?

Randy McMurchy LFS-User at mcmurchy.com
Sun Aug 7 23:27:24 PDT 2005


Jim Gifford wrote these words on 08/08/05 01:17 CST:

> Not something that checks a word file, I would go for a password scheme 
> enforcement solution for shadow  or even a replacement of shadow altogether.

Well great, Jim. We are getting somewhere. You obviously agree that a
solution to provide better password security for LFS is a good thing.

Cracklib is a step in the right direction, and can be implemented
immediately. We can use it while you are researching the Shadow
replacement packages.

After you complete your research, and post your finding to this list,
we will all have a chance to review and comment on your suggestion.
Then, after a thorough discussion, we can determine if Shadow should
be replaced.

If replacing Shadow is not feasible, then please, submit alternative
suggestions for password enforcement schemes.

But to just blindly disagree with something we have at our disposal
*right now*, that works, is just being disagreeable for no reason.

-- 
Randy

rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686]
01:22:00 up 128 days, 55 min, 5 users, load average: 0.06, 0.55, 0.71



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list