On 05/06/2015 04:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> I don't necessarily object to this idea, but I do think we need to ensure
>> that we don't allow both trust and peer to be disabled (which means on
>> Windows you would not be able to disable trust). Otherwise this becomes a
>> footgun which would require the whole server to be stopped so you could
>> connect in single user mode to correct certain mistakes, which are
>> unfortunately all too common.
> Of course that's precisely what the OP wanted to do, which goes to my
> point that not everybody's going to want the same thing.
>
If that is indeed the proposal, then I vote no.
But he did say upthread:
> Single user sessions would work, but the "peer" authentication is also
> still available and should be the preferred method to reset passwords
> when trust is disabled, so this should not be an issue.
(Personally I think there's a very good case for completely ripping out
RFC1413 ident auth. I've not seen it used in a great long while, and
it's always been a security risk.)
cheers
andrew
