On 18/12/13 05:26, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 09:51:30AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 5:10 PM, James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:
>>> For reference, see:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Server_Side_TLS
>>>
>>> for the currently suggested suite for TLS servers.
>> ...
>>> But for pgsql, I'd leave off the !PSK; pre-shared keys may prove useful
>>> for some. And RC4, perhaps, also should be !ed.
>>>
>>> And if anyone wants Kerberos tls-authentication, one could add
>>> KRB5-DES-CBC3-SHA, but that is ssl3-only.
>>>
>>> Once salsa20-poly1305 lands in openssl, that should be added to the
>>> start of the list.
>> I'm starting to think we should just leave this well enough alone. We
>> can't seem to find two people with the same idea of what would be
>> better than what we have now. And of course the point of making it a
>> setting in the first place is that each person can set it to whatever
>> they deem best.
> Yes, I am seeing that too. Can we agree on one that is _better_ than
> what we have now, even if we can't agree on a _best_ one?
>
Because various security agencies probably have people trying to confuse
the issue, and acting to discourage strong encryption...
Possibly choose the one computationally most difficult to crack - but
even then, we don't know what algorithms they are using, which are bound
to be very sophisticated.
I've a horrible feeling, that I'm not paranoid enough!
Cheers,
Gavin
