Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL
Date
Msg-id 467CEF45.6090600@hagander.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL  ("Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>>> That won't help; that would introduce the "embarrassment" of
>>>> having a known default password.
>>> No it wouldn't unless the packagers set it up to do that. My
>>> point is that when a packager (or source) runs initdb, it would
>>> prompt for the postgres user password.
>> Practically every existing packaging of PG tries to run initdb as a
>>  hidden, behind-the-scenes, definitely not-interactive procedure.
>> 
> 
> afaik, practically every existing packaging of pg has *already*
> solved the problem and does not set trust as default anyway. ident
> sameuser I think is the most common.
> 
> One thing I've thought about doing is to remove the default in initdb
> completely and *force* the user to choose auth type. Packagers can
> then just use that to set ident or whatever. and interactive users
> can pick trust if they really need it, but it will be a known choice.
> 
> 

Since nobody comemnted on this, let me turn it around and ask: Does
anybody have any reason *not* to do this?

If not, I'll just make it happen... (that should at least make people
speak up :P)

//Magnus



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: How do we create the releases?
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: Bugtraq: Having Fun With PostgreSQL