Re: Defaulting to password_encryption = scram-sha-256 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Defaulting to password_encryption = scram-sha-256
Date
Msg-id 20181007080342.GC2710@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Defaulting to password_encryption = scram-sha-256  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Defaulting to password_encryption = scram-sha-256  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Oct 06, 2018 at 11:43:06PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Now that we probably have shaken the worst issues out of scram,
> shouldn't we change the default password_encryption to something that
> doesn't scare people?   The only reason I could think of not wanting to
> do that for is that we don't necessarily guarantee that we have a strong
> random generator, but if that's the issue, we should change initdb to
> default it to something safe if the platform provides something. Which
> is just about any sane one, no?

In short, +1.

The random function issue would apply to any platform in need of
--disable-strong-random, but this applies mainly to some old HP-UX stuff
if my memory serves me well, so I'd like to think that we should be safe
to just switch the default and not complicate initdb.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade failed with ERROR: null relpartbound for relation18159 error.
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Unclear error message