Re: Password issue revisited

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Shane Ambler <pgsql(at)Sheeky(dot)Biz>, Michael Schmidt <michaelmschmidt(at)msn(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Password issue revisited
Date: 2007-02-23 20:20:46
Message-ID: 200702232020.l1NKKkI29449@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs pgsql-general


I assume this is not a TODO.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >>> The default on *all* windows versions since NT 4.0 (which is when the
> >>> directory we use was added) will put this file in a protected directory.
> >>> The only case when it's not protected by default is if you're usnig FAT
> >>> filesystem, in which case there is nothing you can do about it anyway.
> >>> On unix, the file will often be created in outside-readable mode by
> >>> default, depending on how your OS is set up.
> >
> > I believe that .pgpass on *nix won't be used if it is readable by anyone
> > except the current user.
>
> No, root can always read it. On unix, there is one "root". On windows,
> the concept of administrator is less clear.
>
>
> > From the docs -
> > The permissions on .pgpass must disallow any access to world or group;
> > achieve this by the command chmod 0600 ~/.pgpass. If the permissions are
> > less strict than this, the file will be ignored. (The file permissions
> > are not currently checked on Microsoft Windows, however.)
> >
> > I would think that if they are using FAT filesystem (which is only
> > partially supported for developers benefit) then they can't use pgpass.
>
> If they are using FAT, the obviously don't care about the security of
> the system anyway, so it's not a problem, IMHO. So we only have to care
> about people who use NTFS.
>
>
> >>> So to reach a situation where the file lives in an unprotected
> >>> directory, you must actively open up the directory in question. Which is
> >>> hidden from default view, so you really need to know what you're
> >>> doing to
> >>> get there.
> >>>
> >>> Not to mention it's a pain to define what permissions are ok and what
> >>> are not. We're talking ACLs and not filemodes - so how do you decide
> >>> which accounts are ok to have access, and which are not?
> >
> > I would say the same as the *nix version - if it is readable or writable
> > by anyone except the current user it is potentially at risk, the current
> > user connecting to pgsql is the only use for this file.
> > Which I believe is the whole point of the TODO entry, stop anyone using
> > the pgpass file without proper security.
>
> Again, it's a lot harder to actually define it on Windows. What if your
> user has access only through a group? What about DENY permissions.
> Things like that.
>
>
> > The other thing to consider is that pgpass is the file referenced by
> > PGPASSFILE - the user can set this to point to a file anywhere on any
> > drive available.
>
> That's a very valid point though, didn't think about that.
>
> Still doesn't take away the "how" part, though, but it does take away
> part of the "why" part.
>
> //Magnus
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2007-02-25 05:06:46 Re: Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-02-23 19:07:23 Re: should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2007-02-23 20:31:26 Re: Ruby on Rails for PostgreSQL
Previous Message Tino Wildenhain 2007-02-23 20:15:41 Re: postgresql vs mysql