Re: psql+openssl+uniware7

From: Olivier PRENANT <ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: psql+openssl+uniware7
Date: 2001-06-23 16:49:38
Message-ID: Pine.UW2.4.21.0106231838190.21262-100000@server.pyrenet.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I was afraid you would say that.

As a user of postgresql for many years, one thing I love is that it's
multi-platform.

Unfortunatly, not all platforms have /dev/urandom.

here is part of openssl doc (RAND_add.pod)

OpenSSL makes sure that the PRNG state is unique for each thread. On
systems that provide C</dev/urandom>, the randomness device is used
to seed the PRNG transparently. However, on all other systems, the
application is responsible for seeding the PRNG by calling RAND_add(),
L<RAND_egd(3)|RAND_egd(3)>
or L<RAND_load_file(3)|RAND_load_file(3)>.

It clearly states that THE APPLICATION (psql) is responsible for seedinf
the PRNG. ISTM, saying it's a bug of openssl when it's IN THE DOC seems a
bit "unnice".

Even openssh (widely used) seeds PRNG itself.

I'm not trying to start a war, I love Postgresql too much for that, but
just say, I'll TRY to come up with a patch.

Regards,

On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> Olivier PRENANT <ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr> writes:
> >> Shouldn't this be handled by the OpenSSL configuration?
>
> > Not yet, opensl-0.9.7 will detect egd. Until then, client has to seed
> > prng.
>
> I think we shouldn't patch our code to work around an openssl bug that
> will go away soon anyway.
>
> regards, tom lane
>

--
Olivier PRENANT Tel: +33-5-61-50-97-00 (Work)
Quartier d'Harraud Turrou +33-5-61-50-97-01 (Fax)
31190 AUTERIVE +33-6-07-63-80-64 (GSM)
FRANCE Email: ohp(at)pyrenet(dot)fr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Make your life a dream, make your dream a reality. (St Exupery)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-23 17:17:27 Re: [GENERAL] Multiple Indexing, performance impact
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-06-23 16:32:17 Re: [GENERAL] Multiple Indexing, performance impact