On 2023-01-09 Mo 10:07, Jelte Fennema wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying your reasoning. I now agree that ssrootcert=system
> is now the best option.
Cool, that looks like a consensus.
>
>>> 2. Should we allow the same approach with ssl_ca_file on the server side, for client cert validation?
>> I don't know enough about this use case to implement it safely. We'd
>> have to make sure the HBA entry is checking the hostname (so that we
>> do the reverse DNS dance), and I guess we'd need to introduce a new
>> clientcert verify-* mode? Also, it seems like server operators are
>> more likely to know exactly which roots they need, at least compared
>> to clients. I agree the feature is useful, but I'm not excited about
>> attaching it to this patchset.
I'm confused. A client cert might not have a hostname at all, and isn't
used to verify the connecting address, but to verify the username. It
needs to have a CN/DN equal to the user name of the connection, or that
maps to that name via pg_ident.conf.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
