Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL
Date
Msg-id 1BE7D620-FF6A-4F77-B4A0-ABC78A472FC7@decibel.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Jun 18, 2007, at 12:58 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> Christopher Browne wrote:
>>> That won't help; that would introduce the "embarrassment" of  
>>> having a
>>> known default password.
>
>> No it wouldn't unless the packagers set it up to do that. My point is
>> that when a packager (or source) runs initdb, it would prompt for the
>> postgres user password.
>
> Practically every existing packaging of PG tries to run initdb as a
> hidden, behind-the-scenes, definitely not-interactive procedure.

I know there's issues with using ident sameuser via TCP, but what  
about for filesystem socket connections?

As for the interactive/non-interactive, we could just leave that as  
an option to initdb, and make the default to ask for a password.  
Packagers would just need to feed the right option to initdb.
--
Jim Nasby                                            jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB      http://enterprisedb.com      512.569.9461 (cell)




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: GUC time unit spelling a bit inconsistent
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: GUC time unit spelling a bit inconsistent