Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?
Date
Msg-id 20150624160151.GX4797@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2015-06-24 11:57:53 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/23/15 2:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I do not know at this point whether these behaviors are really the same
> > bug or not, but I wonder whether it's time to consider back-patching the
> > renegotiation fixes we did in 9.4.
> 
> If Red Hat fixes their bug, then PostgreSQL doesn't have any actual
> problem anymore, does it?

It does, there are numerous bugs around renegotiation that exist with
upstream openssl and postgres. More in the older branches, but even in
HEAD we break regularly. Most only occur in replication connections (due
to copy both) and/or when using more complex clients where clients and
servers send data at the same time due to pipelining.

Greetings,

Andres Freund



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?