UTF16 surrogate pairs in UTF8 encoding - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject UTF16 surrogate pairs in UTF8 encoding
Date
Msg-id 19456.1282501760@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: UTF16 surrogate pairs in UTF8 encoding  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Re: UTF16 surrogate pairs in UTF8 encoding  (Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
I just noticed that we are now advertising the ability to insert UTF16
surrogate pairs in strings and identifiers (see section 4.1.2.2 in
current docs, in particular).  Is this really wise?  I thought that
surrogate pairs were specifically prohibited in UTF8 strings, because
of the security hazards implicit in having more than one way to
represent the same code point.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Erik Rijkers"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_archivecleanup debug message consistency
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: security label support, part.2