Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords
Date
Msg-id 200108161343.f7GDhHI15371@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-patches
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > OK, patch attached.  Pretty nifty. Try MD5 first, and if it fails, try
> > crypt.
>
> What???
>
> Where did *that* idea come from?  If I'm using the new auth method
> because I don't think the old one is secure, I sure as heck don't want
> an old (or deliberately-broken) client to cause a fallback to a less
> secure method.
>
> If MD5 is specified in the config file, and the client doesn't support
> it, then you *fail*.  Full stop.

But we don't have a new MD5 pg_hba.conf config option.  There is only
crypt.  Do we want a new one just for MD5?  I don't think we considered
crypt to be insecure.  The problem was not encrypting pg_shadow.

You are correct that if the password fails, crypt is going to be sent
over the wire.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords