Re: Upcoming re-releases

From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: "Florian Weimer" <fw(at)deneb(dot)enyo(dot)de>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Upcoming re-releases
Date: 2006-02-11 16:51:02
Message-ID: 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCEA0F77A@algol.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I'm not sure whether our current SSL support does a good job of this
> --- I think it only tries to check whether the server
> presents a valid certificate, not which cert it is. Possibly
> Kerberos does more, but I dunno a thing about that...

If you stick a root certificate (root.crt in ~/.postgresql) for it to
validate against, it will be validated against that root. I'm not sure
if it validates the common name of the cert though - that would be an
issue if you're using a global CA. If you're using a local enterprise
CA, that's a much smaller issue (because you yourself have total control
over who gets certificates issued by the CA).

The way our Kerberos implementation is done, it does *not* validate the
server, just the client. If you want server verification, you must use a
combination of both Kerberos and SSL.

//Magnus

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-02-11 17:16:10 Re: Upcoming re-releases
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-02-11 16:41:01 Re: Upcoming re-releases