X-no-Archive:yes
This is the first article I've read for breaking up Microsoft that I've
found interesting, informative, and balanced, IMO.

As for who's to say about Kerberos, those comfortable reading RFCs and
commenting on their implementations are most likely to have something to say
worth hearing. I believe that I know as much about the mythological dog and
various topographies of Hell and Hades as I do about Kerberos security (back
when I was reading that kind of literature, I had more time for reading, and
even did a paper for Literature class on quoted sources in the Divine Comedy
- there's a career-advancing skill set, and a real conversation stopper).
But IIRC, an important Kerberos RFC left a field blank with comments or
suggestions for future implementation, and MS did something resembling those
ideas, while no one else has. While the usefulness, value, and impact are
subjects for discussion, this is by definition innovation. I would be
interested in hearing from those who have meaningful experience with
Kerberos.

Greg Stigers
http://www.cgiusa.com

-----Original Message-----
From: COLE,GLENN (Non-HP-SantaClara,ex2) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 2:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: OT: MS update

<snip>
   In Windows 2000, the implementation of Kerberos security
   differs subtly from the industry standard.

(Maybe this is just a bug; without more info, who's to say?)

Anyway, I found the article an interesting read.

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/08/000508oplivingston.xml

--Glenn