Re: SSL renegotiation

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Troels Nielsen <bn(dot)troels(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SSL renegotiation
Date: 2013-07-16 23:19:49
Message-ID: 20130716231949.GB55849@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:41:44AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 08:51:52PM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > Agreed. The OpenSSL Project last applied a security fix to 0.9.6
> > over eight years ago. Compatibility with 0.9.6 has zero or negative
> > value.
>
> You've made a persuasive case that we should actively break backward
> compatibility here. Would that be complicated to do?

Nope. If Alvaro's code change builds under 0.9.6, malfunctioning only at
runtime, I suspect we would add a "configure"-time version check and possibly
a runtime one as well.

--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2013-07-17 00:29:09 pgsql: Fix systable_recheck_tuple() for MVCC scan snapshots.
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2013-07-16 23:18:12 pgsql: Add --progress option to show progress report

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2013-07-17 00:30:06 Re: findDependentObjects() mutual exclusion vs. MVCC catalog scans
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2013-07-16 23:18:13 Re: XLogInsert scaling, revisited