On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Rick Goyette wrote:

> So you use pam_unix instead of pam_pwdb? Is there any practical
> difference in behavior between the two?

Well, you've already seen that pam_unix works for you, and pam_pwdb doesn't.
:)

Other differences between the two:

* pam_pwdb depends on libpwdb, which doesn't appear to be actively maintained
* pam_pwdb is very inefficient, making it unsuitable for use with large
  password files
* libpwdb has its own configuration file, separate from the config for PAM and
  NSS. This has caused many a problem for people who don't know about this
  other config file (and it's not particularly well-documented).

So all in all, it's better to use pam_unix than pam_pwdb in most cases
(assuming you have a recent version of Linux-PAM).

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

_______________________________________________
Pam-list mailing list
Pam-listredhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pam-list

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]