Re: Debian bug 531341

2009-07-21 Thread Nicolas François
Hello, On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:44:28AM -0500, tallg...@austin.rr.com wrote: > > >Then I will try to remember this thread when I look again at this bug. > >Hopefully soon. > > We can summarize the conclusions and post that to the bug. How does > that sound? If the bug is solved this week ,th

Re: Debian bug 531341

2009-07-21 Thread Nicolas François
Hello Julie, On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 07:58:37PM -0500, tallg...@austin.rr.com wrote: > > I've taken the "bug" e-mail address out of the Cc list -- don't > think this discussion would be productive there. Then I will try to remember this thread when I look again at this bug. Hopefully soon. > I

Re: Debian bug 531341

2009-07-20 Thread Nicolas François
Hello, On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 02:01:27PM -0500, tallg...@austin.rr.com wrote: > > I think that you're confusing the requirement that unknown user names > not be logged, because they might be a user's password with the > non-existent requirement that all unknown user names be treated like > "root

Re: pam.d common-passwd: obscure option includes "similar" but is vague

2006-03-23 Thread Nicolas François
Hello, On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:36:05AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > in /etc/pam.d/common-password there is: > > password required pam_unix.so nullok obscure min=4 max=8 md5 I've just noticed that the obscure option doesn't work (#358697) > Does anyone know what is the exact defin

Re: "obscure" in /etc/pam.d/common-password what does it mean exactly?

2006-03-22 Thread Nicolas François
Hello, On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 03:33:39PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I've scoured through all Debian pam documentation, upstream PAM docs, > and did extensive googling but cannot find the definition of "obscure" > as it applies to common-password. Anyone have any info on this? > > > I

Re: Password authentication with LDAP and SSH

2006-03-02 Thread Nicolas François
hello, There is an open bug on login regarding LDAP (http://bugs.debian.org/277767). It may (maybe not) be related. In any case, it would be nice if somebody could have a look at it, or at least indicate if it can be reproduced or not on your environment. The Shadow maintainers lack resources to

Re: SpamAssassin DOS-Fix anytime soon ?

2005-06-24 Thread Nicolas François
Hello Marek, On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 03:52:14PM +0200, Marek Olejniczak wrote: > There is also a bug in su package which is since 6 days not fixed. Hallo, > security team, wake up! Debian Sarge is buggy! Sarge is dangerous. Just to be sure. You meant the sudo package? Kind Regards, -- Nekral