[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: [ldapext] Re: Password Policy for LDAP Directories



I believe we all agree that from a security point of view, it is much better to have a fixed max age for the password and expiration regardless of whether warning was sent or not.

Ludovic.

Andrew Sciberras wrote:

Sorry Jim... I see where your coming from now :)

Yep I agree.

Andrew.

Jim Sermersheim wrote:

Actually, I suggested that the password expire at its max age (regardles
of whether any warnings have been sent).
Jim



Andrew Sciberras <andrew.sciberras@eB2Bcom.com> 10/25/04 3:36:19 PM


G'Day

I'm generally satisfied with this.

If any directories exist today that use the following model:
* pwdMaxAge - Absolute maximum age of the password
* pwdExpireWarning - Time period before the max age in which warnings will be delivered,


Then changing the semantics of these attributes would lead to
unexpected behavior if an organization upgraded their directory server to the new


functionality.

Eg. A directory that wants to warn people 6 months before their
password is due to expire.
pwdMaxAge = 31536000 (1 year)
pwdExpireWarning = 15768000 (6 Months)

Updating the directory server to one that supports Jim's suggestion below will result in the password reaching its max age, then remaining

valid for another 6 months.


I'm not too sure if this is likely to be a serious problem for implementations, but some text in the security considerations of the draft indicating this might be appropriate.


Cheers
_________________________________________
Andrew Sciberras
eB2Bcom - Software Engineer


Jim Sermersheim wrote:


I believe the intent (however wrongly formulated) was to allow the


user

to receive a warning no matter what. Even if the password's max age


has

passed, the user would be allowed pwdExpireWarning seconds to change


the

pwd. The definition of pwdExpireWarning talks about this in a not


very

precise way (The number of seconds before the password will expire


after

the user is first warned of its upcoming expiration.)

Some history to help make sense of things:

The password policy I-D was created as a blend of the (then)


Netscape

and Novell directory password policies.

I believe the original implementors of pwdExpireWarning (Netscape)


used

this to both warn of expiration, and also allow some kind of grace


login

period.
Novell's implementation didn't include the notion of a warning


period.

Only a number of grace logins.

So now we have two ways of achieving 'grace login'.

A better way of specifying the pwdExpireWarning and pwdMaxAge


concepts

would have been to use one attribute to specify an age at which an
expiration warning is sent, and another attribute specified how long
these warnings will continue before the password finally expires.

I dislike having two similar but different grace mechanisms, so I
propose that we remove pwdExpireWarned, and expire the password when


it

reaches pwdMaxAge (regardless of whether any warnings have been


sent).

I'll update the I-D to reflect this without debate (because the
deadline is so near), and we can go from there.

Jim



Andrew Sciberras < andrew.sciberras@eB2Bcom.com > 9/14/04 7:48:25


PM

Hi Niel,


Neil Dunbar wrote: <SNIP>

The pwdMaxAge should be the absolute maximum time that the password


can


be used by anyone as a credential. The pwdExpirationWarning time, I
think, should be the earliest opportunity that the directory server


can


warn the user that his/her password is approaching expiry. If the


user


comes into the expiry period late in the game - tough. You can


always


use the grace logins feature to allow the user with the dud password


to


change it after it has ceased to be a meaningful credential for


general


directory operations


</SNIP>


If someone was to implement the draft in its current form, their


first

warning time would indicate the time difference between the current
time and the time that the password is due to expire. Subsequent logins
would result in a warning time that will go beyond the specified pwdMaxAge



allowing the user to receive their full warning period.

Our implementation, which was based around the -05 version of the


draft

handled this inconsistency by returning an initial warning message of



pwdExpireWarning.

I've now noticed, in version -07 of the draft, that the following new



line exists within the description of pwdExpireWarning:
If not 0, the value must be smaller than the value of the pwdMaxAge attribute.


This seriously implies that the author's intention is to ensure that
the warning time does not exceed the maximum age of the password.

I'm not extremely passionate about whether a user should receive


their

full warning period. Some consensus on this issue, and the author's opinion (Jim?) would be good though.


Andrew Sciberras eB2Bcom - Software Engineer






------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext







_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext


--
Ludovic Poitou
Directory Architect.
Directory Server Group, Grenoble, France
Sun Microsystems Inc.

Sun Microsystems requires the following notice:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOTICE:  This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy
all copies of the original message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


_______________________________________________ Ldapext mailing list Ldapext@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext