Re: scram-sha-256 broken with FIPS and OpenSSL 1.0.2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: scram-sha-256 broken with FIPS and OpenSSL 1.0.2
Date
Msg-id B78B85CE-EC44-49E5-8708-59FF3CA9C1C7@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: scram-sha-256 broken with FIPS and OpenSSL 1.0.2  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: scram-sha-256 broken with FIPS and OpenSSL 1.0.2  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
> On 30 Nov 2020, at 14:13, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 01:43:24PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:

>> Since the cryptohash support is now generalized behind an abstraction layer,
>> wouldn't it make sense to roll the resource ownership there as well kind of
>> like how JIT is handled?  It would make it easier to implement TLS backend
>> support, and we won't have to inject OpenSSL headers here.
>
> So, you are referring here about using a new API in the abstraction
> layer.  This makes sense.  What about naming that
> pg_cryptohash_context_free(void *)?

Yeah, that's along the lines of what I was thinking of.

cheers ./daniel


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dmitry Dolgov
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Generic type subscripting
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions