Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection
Date
Msg-id 1270637512.24910.6695.camel@ebony
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Thoughts on pg_hba.conf rejection  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
When there is a specific reject rule, why does the server say 

FATAL:  no pg_hba.conf entry

That sounds like an administrative error, rather than a specific
decision on the part of an admin to reject the connection. Suggested
message would be

FATAL: connection rejected for host "xxx", user "xxxx", database "xxx"

Clearly needs to be secure. Does the second message give any information
to a would-be hacker than the first? I don't think so, but it certainly
helps an admin work out if they've missed something.

-- Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Win32 timezone matching
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Quoting in recovery.conf