Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email email@example.com
From: Steffen Dettmer (steffen_at_dett.de)
Date: Mon Jan 27 2003 - 15:00:57 CST
* Achim Hoffmann wrote on Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 18:08 +0100:
> On Fri, 24 Jan 2003, Steffen Dettmer wrote:
> > * Achim Hoffmann wrote on Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 23:15 +0100:
> > > Things might get more complicated for attackers if you use for
> > > example LDAP as authentification, there it's not that simple to
> > > get valid usernames.
> > Yes, interesting point. But in practice I still think that there
> > is a name (claim) and a secret (prove), and to get it clear, the
> > secret is secret :)
> LDAP can be configured to return inexpressive errors
> This way at least the usernme must be known (claimed), guessing is worthless
> or results in a brute force attack.
The same applies for good login / authentication services,
normaly you should not learn if password or already the username
is wrong. KDM is an exception, here you can see usually if a
username exists (since the default session is read before
But here you have the claim to be some user, and you have to
prove you identity by proving that you know a secret, the
-- Dieses Schreiben wurde maschinell erstellt, es trägt daher weder Unterschrift noch Siegel.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands, e-mail: suse-security-helpsuse.com Security-related bug reports go to securitysuse.de, not here