Microsoft Openly Provides Kerberos Interop Specs

konstant writes: "Microsoft has published a document on its TechNet security site providing most of the information in the infamous CAB file plus sample code. There appears to be no onerous license this time." Well, it's not the *whole thing* but has lots of useful info about Microsoft's Kerberos implementation. Strange note: the page where this appears has a footer that says, "Last updated January 21, 2000," but when I did a search on Microsoft.com during our little tussle with them last month, I didn't find it.

Comments

Whoa, Microsoft supporting GNU tools?

[molo]

An excerpt:

Building Sample Data Files

[..]

The following files are needed for building in the Solaris environment, using the Kerberos 5 GSSAPI:

Usre_id.h
User_id.c
K_server.h
Gssapi_k_server.c

Using the GNU GCC compiler, the command line should be:

%gcc -c PDP.c6 user_id.c Gssapi_k_server.c -lgssapi_krb5 -lkrb5

Wow, MS is recommending interoperability with Solaris using GCC! Personally, I never thought I'd live to see this.

Re:Whoa, Microsoft supporting GNU tools?

[Carnage4Life]

Wow, MS is recommending interoperability with Solaris using GCC! Personally, I never thought I'd live to see this.

It's not too surprising once you realize the amount of people with *nix backgrounds that they hire. I have three friends who work there and they all either own a Linux box or have hacked Open Source projects at one time or the other.

The problem with MSFT isn't that they are evil or that they are out to screw Open Source but that they truly believe that the Microsoft Way will advance technology and bring the coolest technology to the masses. It is this belief in their rightness that makes them (at least at the developer level) dangerous to Open Source and third parties. After all, if you believe that without MSFT technology the world would be in the dark ages and your mom wouldn't even be able to use a computer without MSFT wizards and GUIs, then you'd begin to have a certain kind of tunnel vision which would border on delusional.
Basically what I'm trying to say is this, they don't go out of their way to not be interoperable, it simply is that interoperability never crosses their minds when creating software.

What's Missing? Thing MacGyver

[Effugas]

I wasn't the only geek who grew up watching MacGuyver. Essentially, an hour long show(with a great theme song) of Ad Hoc Geekdom saving the world on a regular basis. Great TV; I'm sorry it's gone.

For all the fears about bombmaking information on the Internet, MacGyver in its time never needed to worry it was really teaching kids how to make any form of explosive--while most of the steps were technically accurate(usually), something was always left out so that kids wouln't blow off their fingers and sue the production company.

My question here is, has Microsoft left something out, something minor and non-obvious but critical to successful reimplementation? I'm not accusing them of doing this, but I am interested in what's been removed from the public documentation. Now, it's likely to be nothing--there's more likely more than a few very pissed off Kerberos developers within Microsoft, and I wouldn't be surprised in the least if them and a few "volunteer managers" were starting to get fed up with being used as pawns, particularly with the stock price falling so precipitously. The entire Kerberos debacle was a embarassment for everyone involved and I'm sure MS Upper Management figured that out reasonably quickly.

But still, the question remains: Has anything substantive been removed from these pubic documents?

Yours Truly,

Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com

Did MS back off or what?

[carlhirsch]

but when I did a search on Microsoft.com during our little tussle with them last month, I didn't find it.

What ever happened with that tussle, anyhow? Did MS slink away when Andover's lawyers got tough or what?

-carl

Close, but not quite

[gclef]

As pointed out on kuro5hin, this isn't actually open. The copyright restrictions are still there, if you click on the copyright link at the bottom of the page you get a page that says (among other things):

NOTICE SPECIFIC TO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON THIS WEBSITE. Permission to use Documents (such as white papers, press releases, datasheets and FAQs) from this server ("Server") is granted, provided that (1) the below copyright notice appears in all copies and that both the copyright notice and this permission notice appear, (2) use of such Documents from this Server is for informational and non-commercial or personal use only and will not be copied or posted on any network computer or broadcast in any media, and (3) no modifications of any Documents are made. Educational institutions ( specifically K-12, universities and state community colleges) may download and reproduce the Documents for distribution in the classroom. Distribution outside the classroom requires express written permission. Use for any other purpose is expressly prohibited by law, and may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible

Documents specified above do not include the design or layout of the Microsoft.com website or any other Microsoft owned, operated, licensed or controlled site. Elements of Microsoft websites are protected by trade dress, trademark, unfair competition, and other laws and may not be copied or imitated in whole or in part. No logo, graphic, sound or image from any Microsoft website may be copied or retransmitted unless expressly permitted by Microsoft.

Looks pretty much like the previous release, just without the trade secret nonsense.

DON'T touch them!

[Moderation abuser]

You'll have to become Bill Gates's towel boy to use them!