Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion AuthTktAuthenticationPolicy using MD5
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Florian Rüchel  
View profile  
 More options Sep 23 2012, 8:54 am
From: Florian Rüchel <florian.ruec...@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 05:54:16 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sun, Sep 23 2012 8:54 am
Subject: Re: AuthTktAuthenticationPolicy using MD5

> How about a script that's part of the framework itself? We have pserve,
> pcreate... how about

> pkeygen [-w <filename>]

> or

pyramid-keygen [-w <filename>]


I like this idea very much. I would like to either get this usage approved
or I would just build a simple function inside pyramid. However, such a
function belongs more into an installation than into application code. Can
you tell me how to build such a script that runs on both Windows and Linux?
I would like to see it implemented in this way if Chris approves.

On a seperate note: I have started on improving the documentation. As a
first step, I have edited the `narr/authentication.rst` to include a note
and have documented the API for
`pyramid.authentication.AuthTktAuthenticationPolicy` (better documentation
for secret, add documentation for hashalg). My question is now how would
you handle this in regards to the documentation. I thought about adding
this (or a similar) note everywhere this policy is used. This should raise
the awareness everywhere the docs are read (e.g. tutorials). Furthermore,
since we would clearly recommend to use something like SHA256 if MD5 is not
explicitly needed, should we change the code examples to include a better
hashalg (instead of just documenting it)? I would vote for a yes, since I
don't see any disadvantage: If you build a new application, you should
always use another algorithm and as shown above mod_auth_tkt can also
easily handle other algorithms if configured correctly.

I would like to hear some opinions on this matter before I start to make
big changes and only end up reverting them because you don't like it. My
first version can be found here:
https://github.com/Javex/pyramid/commit/549db4b02cbff2c511eb026d3a585...

I have also created a small `gensecret` function based on the ideas of
Daniel and Domen (but with added Python3 compatibility):
https://github.com/Javex/pyramid/commit/d4f2943fa50e34f682f8097dccee2...
This function is not what I expect in the final version but it shows where
I would like to go with this: Provide a function that makes it easier for a
user to obtain a strong secret. Either we use it this way or the above
mentioned seperate script, that really doesn't matter.

Please tell me your thoughts on both topics.

Regards,
Florian

> I prefer those secrets to exist outside of the code anyway, in separate
> file loaded by the app on start. I don't want them visible by teh GitHub
> staff. :)

> --

> .oO V Oo.

> Work Hard,
> Increase Production,
> Prevent Accidents,
> and Be Happy!  ;)


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.