Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)
Date
Msg-id 20140301215356.GD12995@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> In the case of Unix systems, there is a *far* simpler and more portable
> solution technique, which is to tell the test postmaster to put its socket
> in some non-world-accessible directory created by the test scaffolding.

Yes, yes, yes.

> Of course that doesn't work for Windows, which is why we looked at the
> random-password solution.  But I wonder whether we shouldn't use the
> nonstandard-socket-location approach everywhere else, and only use random
> passwords on Windows.  That would greatly reduce the number of cases to
> worry about for portability of the password-generation code; and perhaps
> we could also push the crypto issue into reliance on some Windows-supplied
> functionality (though I'm just speculating about that part).

Multi-user Windows build systems are *far* more rare than unix
equivilants (though even those are semi-rare in these days w/ all the
VMs running around, but still, you may have University common unix
systems with students building PG- the same just doesn't exist in my
experience on the Windows side).
Thanks,
    Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vik Fearing
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)