Informix doesn't support Linux?

Posted in 2001

Topics: Security, Permissions & Auditing, Platform-Specific Issues

Carrie Coy — Thu, 4 Jan 2001 14:07:02 -0500 — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

We're trying to implement IDS.2000 9.20.UC2 on Linux. Apparently Informix has still not bothered to fix the long-standing bug which prevents PAM password authentication (bug 120510). Is this correct? According to tech support there are no immediate plans to fix it. Is that correct? We happily use a single sign-on system in our organization(http://us1.samba.org/samba/ftp/appliance/winbind.pdf ). Every single linux and windows client is smart enough to authenticate against a single password repository stored on the PDC. Now the whole scheme has to be thrown out to support a very expensive and defective Informix product. How ridiculous is that? How can Informix claim to support Linux ("way coool penguin man") but not bother to fix a crippling bug in their product? -- Carrie Coy SysAdmin Vermont Department of Corrections

↪ replying to Carrie Coy

David Williams — Thu, 4 Jan 2001 21:50:23 +0000 — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

In article <3a54c989@news.state.vt.us>, Carrie Coy <carriec@doc.state.vt.us> writes >We're trying to implement IDS.2000 9.20.UC2 on Linux. Apparently Informix >has still not bothered to fix the long-standing bug which prevents PAM >password authentication (bug 120510). Is this correct? According to >tech support there are no immediate plans to fix it. Is that correct? > >We happily use a single sign-on system in our >organization(http://us1.samba.org/samba/ftp/appliance/winbind.pdf ). Every >single linux and windows client is smart enough to authenticate against a >single password repository stored on the PDC. Now the whole scheme has to >be thrown out to support a very expensive and defective Informix product. >How ridiculous is that? > >How can Informix claim to support Linux ("way coool penguin man") but not >bother to fix a crippling bug in their product? Few people use PAM, most people on all versions of UNIX do not use PAM. >-- >Carrie Coy >SysAdmin >Vermont Department of Corrections > > > -- David Williams

↪ replying to David Williams

Ronald Cole — 04 Jan 2001 23:37:54 -0800 — source: Informix-list mailing list archive (1991-1998)

David Williams <djw@smooth1.demon.co.uk> writes: >Few people use PAM, most people on all versions of UNIX do not use >PAM. People who care about security and authentication use PAM. People who are running RedHat Linux use PAM. Rumor has it that 9.21 is PAM-aware. There is a workaround (which is to *not* use MD5); check dejanews. -- Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412 Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> Phone: (760) 499-9142 President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152 My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B