Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords

From: Jim Mercer <jim(at)reptiles(dot)org>
To: Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords
Date: 2001-06-26 12:56:28
Message-ID: 20010626085627.A14179@reptiles.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 02:34:51PM +0800, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> At 12:51 AM 26-06-2001 -0400, Jim Mercer wrote:
> >this is not so much an enhancement, but a correction of what i think the
> >original "password" authentication scheme was supposed to allow.
> 
> Yep it's a correction. pg_shadow shouldn't have been in plaintext in the
> first place.
> 
>  host all 127.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 password 
> should have meant check crypted passwords in pg_shadow.
> 
> Given your suggestion, what happens when someone does an ALTER USER ...
> WITH PASSWORD ....? 
> 
> Might it be too late to do a fix? 

i didn't want to change things too much.  in the case of ALTER USER, the
code would need to encrypt the password beforehand, either inline, or
using a pgsql-contrib crypt() function.  (i have this if you want it)

the fix is for the authentication behaviour, not the adminitrative interface
(ie. ALTER USER).

-- 
[ Jim Mercer        jim(at)reptiles(dot)org         +1 416 410-5633 ]
[ Now with more and longer words for your reading enjoyment. ]

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-06-26 13:42:11
Subject: Re: stuck spin lock with many concurrent users
Previous:From: John GrayDate: 2001-06-26 11:24:12
Subject: Re: Multi-entry indexes (with a view to XPath queries)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group