Re: password_encryption default - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jonathan S. Katz
Subject Re: password_encryption default
Date
Msg-id 5264b0bd-cf04-1ccb-aafb-a2db64e7b6ba@postgresql.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: password_encryption default  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: password_encryption default  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 5/22/20 5:21 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org> writes:
>> On 5/22/20 9:09 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>>> As someone who is an unabashed SCRAM fan and was hoping the default
>>> would be up'd for v13, I would actually +1 making it the default in v14,
>>> i.e. because 9.5 will be EOL at that point, and as such we both have
>>> every* driver supporting SCRAM AND every version of PostgreSQL
>>> supporting SCRAM.
>
>> Wasn't SCRAM introduced in 10?
>
> Yeah.  But there's still something to Jonathan's argument, because 9.6
> will go EOL in November 2021, which is pretty close to when v14 will
> reach public release (assuming we can hold to the typical schedule).
> If we do it in v13, there'll be a full year where still-supported
> versions of PG can't do SCRAM, implying that clients would likely
> fail to connect to an up-to-date server.

^ that's what I meant.

Jonathan


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: password_encryption default
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: segmentation fault using currtid and partitioned tables