Re: [PATCH v20] GSSAPI encryption support - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [PATCH v20] GSSAPI encryption support
Date
Msg-id dffb5116-6c00-d659-e569-b41489ac4c9a@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH v20] GSSAPI encryption support  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2019-02-18 16:32, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Considering this is only the second encryption protocol in the project's
> lifetime, I agree that using callbacks would be overkill here.  What
> other encryption protocols are you thinking we would be adding here?  I
> think most would be quite hard-pressed to name a second general-purpose
> one beyond TLS/SSL, and those who can almost certainly would say GSS,
> but a third?  Certainly OpenSSH has its own, but it's not intended to be
> general purpose and I can't see us adding support for OpenSSH's
> encryption protocol to PG.

I did look into an SSH-based encryption layer at one point.  It's
certainly attractive in terms of simplicity over SSL.  But your point
stands nonetheless, for two or three plausible implementations, we don't
necessarily need a generic plugin system.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nikolay Shaplov
Date:
Subject: Re: Ltree syntax improvement
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Time to change pg_regress diffs to unified by default?