Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM
Date
Msg-id D86E0846-6730-442A-9846-B1FB9F1369FE@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Move OpenSSL random under USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM
List pgsql-hackers
> On 26 Aug 2020, at 09:56, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 03:52:14PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:

>> The attached moves all invocations under the correct guards.  RAND_poll() in
>> fork_process.c needs to happen for both OpenSSL and OpenSSL random, thus the
>> check for both.
>
> Yeah, it could be possible that somebody still calls RAND_bytes() or
> similar without going through pg_strong_random(), so we still need to
> use USE_OPENSSL after forking.  Per this argument, I am not sure I see
> the point of the change in fork_process.c as it seems to me that
> USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM should only be tied to pg_strong_random.c, and
> you'd still get a compilation failure if trying to use
> USE_OPENSSL_RANDOM without --with-openssl.

That's certainly true.  The intention though is to make the code easier to
follow (more explicit/discoverable) for anyone trying to implement support for
TLS backends. It's a very git grep intense process already as it is.

cheers ./daniel


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Strange behavior with polygon and NaN
Next
From: Sait Talha Nisanci
Date:
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)