Re: connection options to yukon
- From: "William \(Bill\) Vaughn" <billvaNoSpam@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 14:32:15 -0700
Both SQL authentication and Windows authentication have security issues and
tradeoffs. If you use TLS you can increase the security of your SQL auth
connection but unless you're good at setting up groups/schema/logins/users,
they can be tough(er) to manage. Windows auth is slower as the domain must
revalidate the credentials on each open. Windows auth can lead to trojan
operations as the application using SSPI security runs under the credentials
of the user executing the program--credentials that might be very different
(and with different/more/less) rights than used when the application was
first written.
The point? There is no "universal" OSFA solution.
--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
www.sqlreportingservices.net
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________
"Sahil Malik [MVP]" <contactmethrumyblog@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e1lakyraFHA.2736@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Connection pooling does not depend on what method you choose to connect -
> Windows auth or Sql auth.
> Connection pooling depends on the fact that repeated SqlConnection objects
> use the exact same connection string.
>
> My recommendation would be to use Windows authentication over sql Auth
> because it is more secure. It is more secure because there is no password
> to
> manage :) (or it is managed by the OS).
>
> Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
>
> - Sahil Malik [MVP]
> http://codebetter.com/blogs/sahil.malik/
> My upcoming ADO.NET 2.0 book - http://tinyurl.com/9bync
>
>
>
>
> <param@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:urNVrlkaFHA.2664@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Hi all, i am a newbie to SQL2005. I have had experience developing apps
>> on
>> .net 1.1 and sql 2000. I am currently working on developing a new
>> solution
>> and looking into feasibility of using sql 2005 as the database and .net
> 1.1
>> as the front end with the enterprise library jan 2005 block to connect to
>> the database. I may also decide to use asp.net 2.0 depending on the new
>> features available which I am still exploring. The question I had is what
> is
>> the best way for an asp.net application (1.1 or 2.0) to connect to a sql
>> 2005 database and make best use of connection pooling.
>>
>> 1. SQL Server Authentication
>>
>> PROS
>>
>> 1. No need for windows accounts or cals
>> 2. Performance
>>
>> CONS
>>
>> 1. Asp.net app needs to store username & password somewhere.
>>
>>
>> 2. Domain Level Windows Account
>>
>> PROS
>>
>> 1. No need for application to store password
>> 2. Easy Management in a Server Farm & DB Connectivity
>>
>> CONS
>>
>> 1. Performance
>>
>> 3. Local Level Windows Account
>>
>> PROS
>>
>> 1. No need for application to store password
>> 2. Performance
>>
>> CONS
>>
>> 1. Complicated management in a server farm and need to create account on
>> each machine with same name etc.
>>
>> 4. SQL 2005 Application Roles?
>>
>>
>> Can anyone make some best practice recommendations?
>>
>> Much appreciated!
>>
>>
>>
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: connection options to yukon
- From: Sahil Malik [MVP]
- Re: connection options to yukon
- From: param
- Re: connection options to yukon
- References:
- connection options to yukon
- From: param
- Re: connection options to yukon
- From: Sahil Malik [MVP]
- connection options to yukon
- Prev by Date: Re: exporting data from one db to another.. using Microsoft Providers.
- Next by Date: RE: 2nd Connection Pass Fails
- Previous by thread: Re: connection options to yukon
- Next by thread: Re: connection options to yukon
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|