Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three
Date
Msg-id f7cc4517-638b-6b63-84e8-f4892a814573@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] SCRAM authentication, take three
List pgsql-hackers
On 4/10/17 04:27, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> One thing to consider is that we just made the decision that "md5" 
> actually means "md5 or scram-sha-256". Extrapolating from that, I think 
> we'll want "scram-sha-256" to mean "scram-sha-256 or scram-sha-256-plus" 
> (i.e. the channel-bonding variant) in the future. And if we get support 
> for scram-sha-512, "scram-sha-256" would presumably allow that too.

But how would you choose between scram-sha-256-plus and scram-sha-512?

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Ongoing issues with representation of empty arrays
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SUBSCRIPTIONS and pg_upgrade