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

Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Chris Campbell <chris_campbell(at)mac(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL
Date: 2010-02-03 15:28:48
Message-ID: 603c8f071002030728y1d1bb029s86625336e53d02a9@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Should we think about adding a GUC to disable renegotiation until this
>> blows over?
>
> Bad idea: once set, it'll never get unset, thus leaving installations
> with a weakened security posture even after they've installed fixed
> versions of openssl.

That's a problem, but our current posture of holding our breath
doesn't seem to be working either.  If we insist on shipping code that
doesn't work with currently-distributed versions of OpenSSL, people
will do things like, say, shut SSL off.  Or packagers of PostgreSQL
will apply patches that disable it unconditionally, leaving us with no
control.

...Robert

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-02-03 15:34:04
Subject: Re: Add on_trusted_init and on_untrusted_init to plperl UPDATED [PATCH]
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-02-03 15:21:25
Subject: Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL

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