remove internal support in pgcrypto? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject remove internal support in pgcrypto?
Date
Msg-id 0b42f1df-8cba-6a30-77d7-acc241cc88c1@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto?  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Re: remove internal support in pgcrypto?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
During the discussion on OpenSSL 3.0.0 support in pgcrypto [0], I 
started to wonder whether the "internal" code variants in pgcrypto (the 
ones that implement the ciphers themselves instead of using OpenSSL) are 
more trouble than they are worth.  As discussed there, keeping this adds 
some amount of complexity in the code that could otherwise easily be 
done away with.

Historically, this made some sense.  OpenSSL support and pgcrypto came 
into PostgreSQL at around the same time.  So it was probably reasonable 
for pgcrypto not to rely exclusively on OpenSSL being available.  But 
today, building PostgreSQL for production without some kind of SSL 
support seems rare, and then nevertheless requiring cryptographic 
hashing and encryption support from pgcrypto seems unreasonable.

So I'm tempted to suggest that we remove the built-in, non-OpenSSL 
cipher and hash implementations in pgcrypto (basically INT_SRCS in 
pgcrypto/Makefile), and then also pursue the simplifications in the 
OpenSSL code paths described in [0].

Thoughts?

(Some thoughts from those pursuing NSS support would also be useful.)


[0]: 
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/b1a62889-bb45-e5e0-d138-7a370a0a334f@enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ilya Gladyshev
Date:
Subject: Per query FDW network stat collection
Next
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Per query FDW network stat collection