Ubuntu resources vs. quality

Posted May 10, 2011 17:48 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
In reply to: Ubuntu resources vs. quality by drag
Parent article: Ubuntu cloud chief beats CTO to exit door (The Register)

Yeah. An ActiveDirectory replacement is needed ASAP. Like, yesterday.

I've seen companies buy specialized Windows servers just to support AD and then use it for other services. I've done this myself, it's scary how easy it is to setup a managed network with IPSec and group policies in Windows. Alas, Samba4 even if successful won't really replace AD so we need something more powerful.

I'm thinking about creating a 'CouchDirectory' suite, based on simple replicated CouchDB database to store account data. It'll solve one of the big problems in ActiveDirectory - offline operations.

Kerberos-based single sign-on can easily be decentralized as well - there's no need for a trusted third party if assymetric crypto is used.

Ubuntu resources vs. quality

Posted May 10, 2011 18:49 UTC (Tue) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (1 responses)

> Alas, Samba4 even if successful won't really replace AD so we need something more powerful.

It's a good start. It provides the basic services you need to build more complex functionality. It's a integrated product and can be deployed easily rather then trying to piece together things from a half a dozen different projects. It can also serve as the front-end to other directory services. Supports Kerberos and all sorts of other basic network services that people require.

Besides the whole windows compatibility it also provides the best file server that Linux has.

But it's just one part.

Another part would be to use Redhat's SSSD daemon and get rid of the horror that is custom nsswitch configurations and nscd....

Ubuntu resources vs. quality

Posted May 10, 2011 19:19 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]

Personally, I'd prefer to ditch Kerberos altogether and replace it with something else. Particularly, MS's perverted version which tries to combine authentication and authorization (PAC), poorly.

And yes, SSS[SSS]D is mighty nice.

<secret disclosure>I'm (my company) trying to port it to Windows (or more precisely, write a similar Windows version), with some success</secret disclosure>