12.12.2011 20:35, Matt Mullins wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
10.12.2011 04:22, Matt Mullins wrote:
auth optional pam_deny.so
auth sufficient pam_unix.so no_warn try_first_pass
auth sufficient pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass
Why you just haven't chang
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
> 10.12.2011 04:22, Matt Mullins wrote:
>> auth optional pam_deny.so
>> auth sufficient pam_unix.so no_warn try_first_pass
>> auth sufficient pam_krb5.so no_warn try_first_pass
>
>
> Why you just haven't changed the last line to `require
10.12.2011 04:22, Matt Mullins wrote:
For my systems, the canonical source of authentication information is
a Kerberos server, but I also want to support old-fashioned Unix
passwords for a handful of users (including myself) just in case the
Kerberos system is unreachable. I'm having a bit of tr
For my systems, the canonical source of authentication information is
a Kerberos server, but I also want to support old-fashioned Unix
passwords for a handful of users (including myself) just in case the
Kerberos system is unreachable. I'm having a bit of trouble adjusting
to the semantics of Free
