[14941] in Kerberos
Re: Death of CyberSafe Kerberos products
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (t0722@pobox.com)
Thu Aug 2 21:39:12 2001
From: t0722@pobox.com
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 20:25:01 -0500
Message-ID: <Qv1pO+J=9XrZmlKOIds1MDquZKcg@4ax.com>
To: kerberos@MIT.EDU
And this is a followup to this thread because . . . ?
On Fri, 3 Aug 2001 00:16:05 +0200, "Joe" <Joe@false-email.com> wrote:
>We currently experimenting with http://www.kewlstuff.co.za/ this product
>It comes with a simple example of how to set up a kerberos type system.
>
>We trying to make a system where people can register for different services,
>and then gain access to them. The idea is that if a person has bought more
>than 2 they get big perks on the rest, and depending on the mix, some
>services become free.
>
>Its not a server that you just set up, you got to write VB code, but once
>you get into it, its easy, flexible and very cheap.
>
>
>
>
><t0722@pobox.com> wrote in message
>news:Gz5bO4V65LdZoGvhbsdd28Ju8eFz@4ax.com...
>> I have been informed by a long-time contact at CyberSafe Corporation
>> that they will be abandoning their Kerberos-related products, which
>> are not providing any profit for the company. I am told that they are
>> negotiating with another company to either purchase the product and
>> the people who support it, or provide support for a fee. However,
>> especially considering today's economy and the low rate of adoption of
>> the product, this is by no means a sure thing.
>>
>> I would be interested in hearing from any other CyberSafe customers
>> who are wrestling with the issue of how to support this product, how
>> to convert to alternative products, or abandon the protocol
>> altogether. I'll post a summary of responses (if any) to
>> comp.protocols.kerberos.
>>
>> Pardon the crossposting. These are the groups in which an article
>> which mentions CyberSafe has appeared recently.
>
