require_ssl with SASL secure layers
julien at trigofacile.com
Sat Jun 20 18:14:47 UTC 2009
> I think we could rename the require_ssl: parameter in readers.conf
> to something like require_encryption: in order to take into account
> both a successful STARTTLS command (or "nnrpd -S") and a successful
> AUTHINFO SASL with a negotiation of a secure layer.
I am facing a problem with that.
AUTHINFO SASL is a bit magical and does not use auth groups...
What I manage to do is when every auth group has require_ssl: set to
true, we prevent people from using AUTHINFO SASL PLAIN/LOGIN/EXTERNAL,
as well as AUTHINFO USER/PASS. (This behaviour was previously only
done with TLS support because require_ssl: was valid only when compiled
But afterwards, I don't always have the possibility to associate an access
group with encryption required.
If AUTHINFO SASL negotiates a security layer, the user cannot use access1
because there is a key and AUTHINFO SASL did not bind to any auth group...
It will bind to access2.
This key: problem is generic in our SASL implementation with readers.conf;
it does not depend on require_ssl: and I do not know well how to handle that.
Something is missing in our SASL implementation... Maybe a sasl_auth:
parameter in an auth group? And the first one that matches will be used?
This parameter would be true/false. (Or another name like sasl_allowed:
or... a list as Jeff suggested "*", "!*", "*,!LOGIN", "CRAM-MD5,OTP"...)
The default would be "*".
At the same time, while parsing auth groups after authentication, we can
see whether a secure layer has been negotiated and decide to keep or not
the auth group, etc.
Any thoughts about that? Other suggestions?
« Quand tu auras lu ces lignes, le papyrus s'autodétruira. » (Astérix)
More information about the inn-workers