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 200108161545.f7GFjj326562@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>
> > OK, I see how I can do that. I thought the salt was part of the startup
> > packet but I see now that it is send during the authentication request.
> > I can make it longer, probably 6 characters:
> >
> >     > 62^6
> >             56800235584
>
> Why not take all 255 characters?

Salt is currently defined as char[2].  Should I encode the rand() as
char[4] and send that, or skip null and still encode it as char[4].

--
  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: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: patch for 60 seconds bug
Next
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix for fetchone() and fetchmany() in Python interface