Re: [Fed-Talk] Re: "Authentication" < > "SSO"
Re: [Fed-Talk] Re: "Authentication" < > "SSO"
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Re: "Authentication" < > "SSO"
- From: Boyd Fletcher <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:00:09 -0500
- Thread-topic: [Fed-Talk] Re: "Authentication" < > "SSO"
Title: Re: [Fed-Talk] Re: "Authentication" < > "SSO"
just for completeness you can also use AD via LDAPv3 for authentication as well.
On 12/29/08 3:07 PM, "Shawn Geddis" <email@hidden> wrote:
On Dec 29, 2008, at 1:50 PM, Timothy J. Miller wrote:
Shawn A. Geddis wrote:
I emphasized *Authentication* .... same I have said for a couple years now...
"Authentication" < > "SSO" (for those not familiar, SSO is Single Sign-On)
And it's as much splitting hairs now as it was then. :)
The reference to "Authentication" < > "SSO" is not splitting hairs. This is a true statement regardless of platform. Authentication is a single instance of proving who or what you are. SSO is a method of access control that enables a user to log in once and gain access to the resources of multiple software systems without being prompted to authenticate again. So, SSO relies on Authentication, but they are not the same.
I will agree that MS AD popularized the thinking that they are the same, but alas they are not.
AD is an Apple-supported directory service. Authentication to AD requires Kerberos.
Well actually, AD allows for multiple authentication mechanisms (depending on versions of course):
- LAN Manager
- NTLM
- NTLMv2
- Kerberos
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden