TNG-stable

[Mayers, Philip J]

You people really are laughable:

b. The Specification is confidential information and a trade secret of
Microsoft. Therefore, you may not disclose the Specification to anyone else
(except as specifically allowed below)

License agreement displayed when you click on the EXE. Samba is an OPEN
SOURCE program. By definition, making use of those specs would require us to
disclose them.

For the record, I clicked on the "No, I do not accept this attack on my
rights as an individual" button... I particularly like the bit on the linked
page,

"IETF specification - (page 46 spells out the optional auth-data field)"

...kind of a "Yah, boo, sucks to you, the spec allows us to not document it,
so there!". Silly little children....

Regards,
Phil

+----------------------------------+
| Phil Mayers, Network Support     |
| Centre for Computing Services    |
| Imperial College                 |
+----------------------------------+  

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Kuhne [mailto:mkuhne at microsoft.com]
Sent: 29 September 2000 13:16
To: 'Mike Brodbelt'; Cole, Timothy D.
Cc: Samba NT Domains Mailing List
Subject: RE: TNG-stable


This is a myth. See http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/kerbtech.asp
(including the PAC specs)

Regards,
Martin Kuhne
Escalation Engineer, Critical Problem Resolution (CPR)
Microsoft GmbH

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Brodbelt [mailto:m.brodbelt at acu.ac.uk]
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 12:29 PM
To: Cole, Timothy D.
Cc: Samba NT Domains Mailing List; 'Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton'
Subject: Re: TNG-stable

[...]

What are the plans with regard to this? Are there any? The mess MS made
of Kerberos caused a lot of discussion a while ago, but I've heard
little since. Is anyone working from the MS document on the grounds that
their position that it is a trade secret is legally untenable, or is
anyone trying to clean room reverse engineer the protocol? Or is it just
too soon for anything to happen in this arena yet?

[...]