| From: | Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Trevor Talbot <quension(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomasz Ostrowski <tometzky(at)batory(dot)org(dot)pl>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Spoofing as the postmaster |
| Date: | 2007-12-24 19:47:25 |
| Message-ID: | 47700CCD.5050808@mark.mielke.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Mark Mielke wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree - I forgot there were different flavours. I think any of these
>> are just as good as SSL with public key authentication, and perhaps a
>> lot cheaper in terms of performance. The only piece of information
>> missing is the uid to compare against, which may as well be provided in
>> the db open parameters the same as any other parameters might be provided.
>>
>
> True, but if you are going to have the client check a uid we might as
> well just put the socket file in a secure directory and be done with it.
>
That's a good point too... :-)
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke <mark(at)mielke(dot)cc>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Decibel! | 2007-12-24 20:27:24 | Re: Spoofing as the postmaster |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2007-12-24 17:43:12 | Re: Spoofing as the postmaster |