Re: Is "trust" really a good default? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Is "trust" really a good default?
Date
Msg-id 200407122011.i6CKBg018849@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is "trust" really a good default?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Is "trust" really a good default?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Is "trust" really a good default?  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net> writes:
> > Is it really such a good idea to have "trust" authentication enabled for
> > localhost (TCP/IP and Unix sockets) by default?
> 
> No, but none of the others are better.  See previous discussions in the
> archives.  I don't think the situation has changed any since the last
> time we hashed this out.

If they supply a password to initdb, shouldn't we then require a
password in pg_hba.conf.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Is "trust" really a good default?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Is "trust" really a good default?