[Samba] getting rid of lmhashes?

[Gerald (Jerry) Carter]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Andrew Bartlett wrote:

>> The only thing about the original patch that made me go
>> ughh was the new parameter.  Can we piggy back this off
>> an existing setting somehow?  Perhaps 'lanman auth = no'?
> 
> That would be reasonable, and has pro's and cons:
>
>  - The admin probably expects that 'lanman auth = no' 
> prevents any work (storage and authentication) with
> the LM hash
>
>  - But this prevents the admin from storing the hash 
> for the future, in case he has to back out of the
> security upgrade (finds win9X machines back on
> the network).

Since it would only affect users who had changed their
password, I think that's ok.  Unless anyone has violent
objections I'll make the smake change to Mark's patch
and get it in for 3.0.22.






cheers, jerry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEDYQEIR7qMdg1EfYRAszqAJ97E6TmVbzxRXiftmp6xisYt8KApwCdHUPn
KFsv+iCIvdHVnRdBxhN5xxA=
=01Fo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----