Re: ssl_library parameter - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: ssl_library parameter
Date
Msg-id 0c9e8c80-ae4d-faab-c4a1-ddb15f50a9c9@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ssl_library parameter  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 6/26/18 17:48, Tom Lane wrote:
> (1) I'm not really clear why we need this.  GUC variables aren't free.
> 
> (2) Are there security issues with exposing this info to everybody?

This functionality was requested in the threads about GnuTLS and other
SSL implementations so that users/admins can determine which SSL
settings are applicable.

I'm not sure about the security impact.  We do expose all the other
ssl_* settings to ordinary users, so if users want to see whether the
server is misconfigured or something like that, they can already do
that.  I think in the context of an SSL connection, the server is not
supposed to be the adversary of the client, so if the server can provide
more information about what it's doing to protect the client's
information, then the better.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Langote
Date:
Subject: Re: partitioning - changing a slot's descriptor is expensive
Next
From: Jeevan Chalke
Date:
Subject: Re: Server crashed with TRAP: FailedAssertion("!(parallel_workers >0)" when partitionwise_aggregate true.