| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Ants Aasma <ants(dot)aasma(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Data at rest encryption |
| Date: | 2017-06-12 19:38:49 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaXGx=7VEVz7eq9T=raZRHm3iNc244Sx=T1UxX-+szOUQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 6/7/16 9:56 AM, Ants Aasma wrote:
>>
>> Similar things can be achieved with filesystem level encryption.
>> However this is not always optimal for various reasons. One of the
>> better reasons is the desire for HSM based encryption in a storage
>> area network based setup.
>
> Could you explain this in more detail?
I don't think Ants ever responded to this point.
I'm curious whether this is something that is likely to be pursued for
PostgreSQL 11.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-06-12 19:42:55 | Re: Transactional sequence stuff breaks pg_upgrade |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-06-12 19:38:33 | Relpartbound, toasting and pg_class |