| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
| Subject: | Re: TODO: GNU TLS |
| Date: | 2006-12-30 19:28:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20061230192810.GT24675@kenobi.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Joshua D. Drake (jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
>
> > The reason I wanted to use PGP is that I already have a PGP key. X.509
> > certificates are far too complicated (a certificate authority is a
> > useless extra step in my case).
>
> Complete side note but one feature that I brought up to my team a
> potentially useful would be to allow the use of ssh keys for
> authentication.
>
> SSH keys are far more prevalent, and they are understood even at the
> medium corporate level.
While this may be true it's certainly also true that X.509 keys are
understood at both the medium corporate level and mid-level gov't (at
least in the US), especially inside the DOD, where they've been
mandated, as I recall.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-12-30 19:35:05 | Re: Sync Scan update |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2006-12-30 19:26:17 | Re: TODO: GNU TLS |