Re: SASL, compression? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Lincoln Yeoh
Subject Re: SASL, compression?
Date
Msg-id 5.1.0.14.1.20020520134750.02ff54a0@192.228.128.13
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SASL, compression?  (Bear Giles <bgiles@coyotesong.com>)
Responses Re: SASL, compression?  (Bear Giles <bgiles@coyotesong.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
What are the benefits of SASL+Postgresql compared to Postgresql over plain SSL?

Coz Postgresql already supports SSL right?

Cheerio,
Link.

At 03:11 PM 5/18/02 -0600, Bear Giles wrote:
>If it's being used in Sendmail, Cyrus IMAP and OpenLDAP, with preliminary
>work (sponsored by Carnegie Mellon University) in supporting it for CVS
>and LPRng and possibly SSH I think it's safe to say it's beyond "vaporware"
>at this point.


>I'm aware of the various tricks you can do - setting the shell to
>/bin/false, requiring RSA authentication and setting the no-tty flag
>in the 'known_keys' file, etc., but at the end of the day there are
>still extra shell accounts on that system.
>
>SSH tunnels are a good stopgap measure while you add true TLS/SSL
>support, but they can't be considered a replacement for that support.
>
>Bear




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Indexscan API cleanup proposal
Next
From: Bear Giles
Date:
Subject: revised SSL patches submitted