Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> This looks much better.
If the client explicitly sends the SASL EXTERNAL bind, then this is a
desirable feature, and should (subject to ACLs and some configuration
that maps from unix to directory identities) work, preferably in the
default build (but perhaps, like OpenLDAP, without gaining any useful
privileges unless enabled by configuration).
I don't have any objection to SASL EXTERNAL binds, when described as
such. Howard and I have both objected to the concept, as described in
the wiki page, of AutoBind, where contrary to the spec, requests are
authenticated implicitly, without that SASL EXTERNAL bind.
In short: SASL EXTERNAL is the right way to do this, if you do it
way, the objections go away.
Agreed. In fact, in that case, it would make sense to have it always enabled
(whenever the platform supports it). This is what we do with OpenLDAP.
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/