[18786] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: Automatic FAST via Anonymous PKINIT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathaniel McCallum)
Fri May 30 13:13:25 2014
Message-ID: <1401469973.3521.19.camel@ipa.example.com>
From: Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@redhat.com>
To: Nico Williams <nico@sparkhere.com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 13:12:53 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAK3OfOi9sZmWEQsF0JB2_i7vsELQvjSEsdSV8-9j5e_wgLJ1QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: krbdev@mit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
On Fri, 2014-05-30 at 09:16 -0500, Nico Williams wrote:
> Greg's #1 works, just inefficiently. It's a lot better than nothing
> and a no-brainer. #2 doesn't help much. #3 might be more useful than
> you think, but I'd store the FAST armor ticket (it's constrained,
> isn't it?) in the normal ccache, with a link to it from a ccconfig
> entry. #4 is clearly desirable from a systems pov, though i would
> prefer an IPC protocol so as to be better able to apply least
> privilege principles. Still, #4 looks very nice, so it gets my +1.
Thinking through this, I don't know that anything other than #1 is
really needed. Caching only provides a benefit when the ratio of
non-Anonymous ASReqs to Anonymous ASReqs is high. In the typical case of
kinit, this ratio is essentially 1:1, providing no benefit.
The only case I can think of where caching provides a significant
benefit is in the case of a login system. In this case, the ratio could
be very high. If the login system is a single, stateful process #2 might
make sense. But I can't think of a single login system that is
architected this way.
So my vote is #1 now and #4 at a later time.
Nathaniel
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
