Authentification classifications
From: Marc Jaeger (marc.jaeger_at_laposte.net)
Date: 04/27/04
- Next message: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: Authentification classifications"
- Previous message: Alpha: "Is it possible to choose a better way?"
- Next in thread: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: Authentification classifications"
- Reply: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: Authentification classifications"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 27 Apr 2004 06:47:53 -0700
Hi everybody,
I try currently to make a classification of every authentication
methods that exist.
I have noted as authentication methods : /etc/passwd, Windows SAM
file, Active Directory, NIS, PAM, Kerberos, PAP, CHAP, EAP, RADIUS,
NTLM, SASL, SSL, TLS, NDS, TACACS, IPsec, ISAkmp, pki, ..., MD5,
3DES, LDAP,...
Now I try to classify these into criteria such as :
is an authentication binary
is an authentication protocol
uses an authentication protocol
uses cryptography
has a user database
is a framework regrouping other authentications methods
???
??
The goal of this is to make a comparison of authentication methods
which are comparable !
And then see which ones I should implement in my application so it
will be the most flexible.
For instance RADIUS is not a binary (it is much more than that), I
don't know if it is a protocol at its own, it uses a bunch of other
authentication protocols, I don't know if it use cryptographics at its
own, it hasn't its own user database, and yes it is a framework
regrouping other authentications protocols.
Any advice would be welcome !
Marc Jaeger
- Next message: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: Authentification classifications"
- Previous message: Alpha: "Is it possible to choose a better way?"
- Next in thread: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: Authentification classifications"
- Reply: Anne & Lynn Wheeler: "Re: Authentification classifications"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|