Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: May 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: client/server authentication (PR#1767)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: client/server authentication (PR#1767)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: kaufman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: client/server authentication (PR#1767)
From: "Raimar Falke" <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 12:02:19 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:39:49AM -0700, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 11:23:39AM -0700, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > no it won't. As I said before, very few will actually want an 
> > > authenticating
> > > server. Those who do will compile it via --enable-auth.
> > 
> > I would like to see the default authentication included at configure
> > time as the default. On of the reasons is code coverage. We should
> > include the code in the normal compilation to find errors and to
> > include it on changes we do. Just think of the code in the clients
> > which don't get compiled regularly.
> > 
> > If the authentication is enabled or disabled by default is another
> > story.
> 
> no. The server-side code will be compiled often on pubserver. The default
> database code won't, but then it'll be relatively separate from the main
> code anyway. Unless the registry api changes, There won't be much danger.
> This is not a good enough reason to add object code to the executable. This
> is analogous to compiling all the clients all the time if you can, but only 
> linking the one you want. no thank you.

Others?

> > > I absolutely disagree. This will not happen. This is a challenge, response
> > > system. There are a variety of reasons why a server will or will not want 
> > > a
> > > password. The very issue that one can register a user directly from the
> > > connect dialog is enough to not want to do this.
> > 
> > These are technical reasons. Take a step back and think what a user
> > may want. The user is used to enter both username and password. At
> > least I think so.
> 
> you don't use ssh much? or login? Sure windows users may have to adjust a
> bit, but so what. I've thought a great deal about this thank you very much.
> And these are not simply technical issues.

Using a shell-alias I don't have to use a username or password for
almost all of my ssh connections.

I'm speaking about things like
http://www.csn.ul.ie/~caolan/docs/xdm2.html

> > But I agree that implementing this is a technical problem. One
> > solution would be that the client sends the join_request after the
> > user pressed RETURN on the username.
> 
> eh? we do this already. try_to_connect() sends send_packet_login_request().

I mean at the time the input cursor jumps from the user-name to the
password field. Assuming that both are in the same dialog.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "It is not yet possible to change operating system by writing
  to /proc/sys/kernel/ostype."              sysctl(2) man page




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]