Re: Secure and convenient protocol

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:31:18PM +0200, Gregoire leroy wrote:
> I manage the network of a student residence, so I don't have any
> control on the client.

I can understand your pain.  I'm curious though what the purpose of the
VPN is, since that would assist with solution choice.  I can imagine
several purposes, and I'm not sure which you might have.

> My first choice was MSCHAPV2, because it's well supported by most
> OS, but it seems unsecure.

It was considered secure once, but times have changed.  I consider it
unsecure now.

> So, is there a secure protocol, well supported by most OS, with which
> we don't need to touch to the client computer ? (with password, for
> example)

I don't believe so, but I only really know about OpenVPN and PPTP.
Others may know.

Basing a security system on only a password (and not also a token) leads
to a weak system, in the same way as building a house upon the sand near
a river.  A system that hashes passwords (MSCHAPV2) cannot be made more
secure by a longer or more complex password; a brute force attack takes
the same resources.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload 
Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top
priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve 
application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting 
the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev