It feels like MD5 has accumulated enough problems that we need to start
looking for another way to store and pass passwords. The MD5 problems
are:
1) MD5 makes users feel uneasy (though our usage is mostly safe)
2) The per-session salt sent to the client is only 32-bits, meaning
that it is possible to reply an observed MD5 hash in ~16k connection
attempts.
3) Using the user name for the MD5 storage salt allows the MD5 stored
hash to be used on a different cluster if the user used the same
password.
4) Using the user name for the MD5 storage salt causes the renaming of
a user to break the stored password.
For these reasons, it is probably time to start thinking about a
replacement that fixes these issues. We would keep MD5 but recommend
a better option.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
