3 ms·
Yeah, that sounds like a lot of fun for a masochist. As if LDAP isn't a big enough pain in the arse to set up, Kerberos is even worse. Not to mention how much o
by Tharkun 10y ago
Yeah, that sounds like a lot of fun for a masochist. As if LDAP isn't a big enough pain in the arse to set up, Kerberos is even worse. Not to mention how much of a pain it is to integrate it in an application.
- 4ad 10y agoWhat's so hard about Kerberos? Kerberos is orders of magnitude easier to deploy and manage than LDAP. It takes literally minutes (if you have done it before and know what you are doing). In fact it's so easy, that I recommend anyone to use Kerberos even if they don't want to manage the complexity of LDAP. If you use NFS in any meaningful capacity, you have to implement Kerberos, even if you don't have LDAP, otherwise you're implementing a security footgun. Luckily, Kerberos is easy to set up in this configuration, without LDAP. It's true that LDAP+Kerberos is too hard to deploy and manage, but that's LDAP's fault, not Kerberos'. What important application doesn't have Kerberos support already? If you talk about adding Kerberos support to your own applications, I have that to be pretty easy.