Re: pg_authid.rolpassword format (was Re: [HACKERS] Passwordidentifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: pg_authid.rolpassword format (was Re: [HACKERS] Passwordidentifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol)
Date
Msg-id 20161220231439.GA18360@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_authid.rolpassword format (was Re: [HACKERS] Passwordidentifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol)  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Responses Re: pg_authid.rolpassword format (was Re: [HACKERS] Passwordidentifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol)  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
David,

* David Fetter (david@fetter.org) wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 08:34:19AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnaka@iki.fi) wrote:
> > > Even if you have a separate "verifier type" column, it's not fully
> > > normalized, because there's still a dependency between the
> > > verifier and verifier type columns. You will always need to look
> > > at the verifier type to make sense of the verifier itself.
> >
> > That's true- but you don't need to look at the verifier, or even
> > have *access* to the verifier, to look at the verifier type.
>
> Would a view that shows only what's to the left of the first semicolon
> suit this purpose?

Obviously a (security barrier...) view or a (security definer) function
could be used, but I don't believe either is actually a good idea.

Thanks!

Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] too low cost of Bitmap index scan
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Protect syscache from bloating with negative cache entries