Re: Upcoming re-releases - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Upcoming re-releases
Date
Msg-id 20060211203849.GN4474@ns.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Upcoming re-releases  ("Magnus Hagander" <mha@sollentuna.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Magnus Hagander (mha@sollentuna.net) wrote:
> > > The way our Kerberos implementation is done, it does *not* validate
> > > the server, just the client. If you want server
> > verification, you must
> > > use a combination of both Kerberos and SSL.
> >
> > Eh?  We use mutual authentication in Kerberos...
>
> We do? That's good then :-) I was told by someone that we don't. Never
> really checked into it, since all my installations already use SSL for
> that. So, I'll retract my comment ;)

We pass in 'MUTUAL_REQUIRED' to krb5_sendauth and check the return value
of it correctly...  I'd be really curious why 'someone' felt we weren't
doing mutual authentication...  I don't see anything obvious..
Thanks,
    Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: SpeedComparison
Next
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Re: Getting the length of varlength data using PG_DETOAST_DATUM_SLICE