[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PROPOSAL]drop LSB.usersgroups/commands/passwd/T.passwd 2



Andrew,

I know of sites that still use the group password feature. Even if we
offer a waiver here and we assent to the demise of this "feature", for a
very small minority this is still a needed behaviour. As such I recommend
that we retain this. We should however flag all features that are
earmarked for obsolesnce. A suitable notation should be made in the spec.

- John T.

---
| John H Terpstra, VP Technology
| Cell: +1 801 368 4066, Office: (650) 553 9371
| E-mail: jht@caldera.com
|
| "We all hope for positive change in this world.
|  Are you the person who is making the change
|  that we both want?", Anonymous.

On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, Andrew Josey wrote:

> {bits deleted}
> 
> On Jul 29, 10:29pm in "[PROPOSAL]drop LSB.u", Johannes Poehlmann wrote:
> > group passwords offer near zero extra security and are a
> > obsolete concept (if you can add a user to more then one
> 
> Agreed
> >
> > There was some discussion about that, and i do not remember
> > voices in favour of the group passwd concept.
> >
> > I propose to remove the notion of "passwd -g" in the
> > (next) spec and drop the test silently.
> I would be against dropping the test silently. Some further
> actions would be needed before we could get to that stage.
> 
> Since the test follows the specification correctly it should initially
> remain and this issue  be addressed through the certification processes
> and/or by raising a defect report against the specification.
> If the owners of the specification state that there are concerns
> with the specification in this area and propose a change for
> a future revision,  then we could downgrade
> the result to a warning, or grant a  waiver for this failure.
> 
> regards
> Andrew
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-test-request@lists.linuxbase.org
> with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org
> 
> 



Reply to: