Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqS8UVX5FMSg23wKsAMeK6yNbpQGaAci9t1jbHFGr-EvQg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 12:56 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 11/18/17 06:32, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> +       cbind_header_len = 4 + strlen(state->channel_binding_type); /*
>> p=type,, */
>> +       cbind_input_len = cbind_header_len + cbind_data_len;
>> +       cbind_input = malloc(cbind_input_len);
>> +       if (!cbind_input)
>> +           goto oom_error;
>> +       snprintf(cbind_input, cbind_input_len, "p=%s",
>> state->channel_binding_type);
>> +       memcpy(cbind_input + cbind_header_len, cbind_data, cbind_data_len);
>> By looking at RFC5802, a base64 encoding of cbind-input is used:
>> cbind-input   = gs2-header [ cbind-data ]
>> gs2-cbind-flag "," [ authzid ] ","
>> However you are missing two commands after p=%s, no?
>
> fixed

s/commands/commas/. You caught my words correctly.

> I have committed the patch with the above fixes.

Thanks, Peter!

> I'll be off for a week, so perhaps by that time you could make a rebased
> version of the rest?  I'm not sure how much more time I'll have, so
> maybe it will end up being moved to the next CF.

OK, let's see then. That's not an issue for me if this gets bumped.
-- 
Michael


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ginInsertCleanup called from vacuum could still misstuples to be deleted
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical Replication and triggers