> On 24 Mar 2021, at 02:12, thierry bordaz <tbordaz@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi William
>
> Thanks for you review. Some answers are inlined in the mail below.
>
> On 3/23/21 12:33 AM, William Brown wrote:
>> Hey there,
>>
>> I think that you also need:
>>
>>
>> pwdOTPValidFromTime
>>
>> This way an admin can pre-configure all the OTP's and they only "become valid from" that time frame. IE think university enrollment. You can configure all the OTP's a month before, and they become valid at a specific datetime.
>
> That is a very nice idea. Note to be OTP the 'userpassword' of the account must be reset by an admin and the account inheriting password policy with OTP settings.
> Assuming 'pwdOTPValidFromTime' is the account operational attribute holding a precise time. How should it be computed ? Directly from a precise time set in the password policy or computed from a ' 'passwordOTPValidationDelay' (number of seconds after OTP reset time) or something else ?
I think maybe it could be easy to visualise it.
We have time going from past to future like:
past ---------------------------------------------------------> future
So we want a window of:
* When can the OTP start to be used?
* When is the OTP no longer able to be used?
So my thinking is:
past ---------------------------------------------------------> future
^ ^ ^
| | |
otp created | |
otp valid from |
otp expire at
So I would say otp valid from and the otp expire should be *absolute* date times in UTC.
And then within that otp valid from - expire at time window, we have the "max use" field of how many times it can be used.
Does that help?
>>
>> I think you should make it consistent with passwordOTPExpDelay to pwdOTPExpDelay. Better, OTP means "one time password" so why is it "password one time password". Just make the attributes "OTPExpDelay" or whatever. Alternately make it pwdOT (password one time).
> ATM password policy ('passwordPolicy') only contains 'password*' attributes this is why I would prefer to keep 'passwordOTP*' (e.g. passwordOTPMaxUse, passwordOTPExpirationDelay, passwordOTPValidFromTime').
> I agree that 'passwordOTP' looks weird ("password one time password") but the first 'password' is the way the password policy attribute are prefixed.
Ahh I think I missed that this is using the userPassword and combined with passwordPolicy. That makes sense now.
Still better to keep it consistent - all pwd or all password. I think you mix/match these ....
>
> Then the account operational attributes updated via password policy. There is a mix.
> 6 out of 10 start with 'password' (like 'passwordExpirationTime')
> 2 out of 10 start with 'pwd' (like 'pwdReset')
> The two remaining are 'retryCountResetTime' and 'accountUnlockTime'.
> I choose the 'pwdOTP' prefix because the feature is somehow related to 'pwdReset' and also I preferred a different prefix than the password policy.
>>
>> I think passwordOTPExpDelay can be remove if you have ValidFromTime instead.
>
> Why ? Registration should be done after Now+ValidFromTime and before Now+passwordOTPExpDelay.
> So the two are useful.
I'd see above :)
>
>>
>>
>> The OC should be named onetimepasswordPolicy instead.
> Do you suggest we have two password policies OC: passwordPolicy and OnTimePasswordPolicy.
> OTP relying on 'passwordMustChange' then OnTimePasswordPolicy should allow 'passwordMustChange'
Ignore this comment - I think I missed about the passwordPolicy bit :)
>>
>>
>> Hope that helps!
>
> Absolutely it helps a lot. Thanks !
>
> thierry
>>
>>
>>> On 22 Mar 2021, at 21:30, thierry bordaz <tbordaz@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I wrote a small design [1] about OTP password policy that I would like to start implementing.
>>> Comments are welcome
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/otp-password-policy.html
>>>
>>> best regards
>>> thierry
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>> —
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> William Brown
>>
>> Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
>> SUSE Labs, Australia
>> _______________________________________________
>> 389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
>
—
Sincerely,
William Brown
Senior Software Engineer, 389 Directory Server
SUSE Labs, Australia
_______________________________________________
389-devel mailing list -- 389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to 389-devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/389-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
No comments:
Post a Comment