[292] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: [Vick Khera: kerberos for X11R4 server authorization]
jtkohl@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jtkohl@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Wed Sep 19 15:17:31 1990
To: "Barr3y Jaspan" <bjaspan@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
Cc: John T Kohl <jtkohl@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: [Vick Khera: kerberos for X11R4 server authorization]
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 19 Sep 90 00:27:22 -0500.
<9009190427.AA22694@PODGE>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 90 12:22:46 -0400
From: Vick Khera <khera@cs.duke.edu>
+---------
| To: John T Kohl <jtkohl@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
| cc: jfc@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, swick@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, krbdev@ATHENA.MIT.EDU,
rws@EXPO.LCS.MIT.EDU, khera@duke.cs.duke.edu
| From: "Barr3y Jaspan" <bjaspan@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
| Subject: Re: [Vick Khera: kerberos for X11R4 server authorization]
| Date: Wed, 19 Sep 90 00:27:22 EDT
|
| At least in the Project Athena environment, such a modification would
| not be useful under Kerberos Version 4 since most users run on a
| public workstation (a machine not registered with Kerberos).
true enough. the environment i developed this under assumes that
workstations are trusted (root is not generally available) and each
workstation can be logged into using kerberos.
| On the other hand, a Kerberos Version 5 extension *would* be useful
| since user-to-user authentication could be used. Something like "xset
this would be ideal, and i suspect that there will be little modification
needed to the code i wrote.
| Just my personal opinions,
| Barr3y Jaspan, bjaspan@athena.mit.edu
+---------
thanks for responding. i'll be posting the general announcement later today
on comp.windows.x and comp.protocols.kerberos and see what kind of response
i get.
v.
