Re: DH_check return value test correct?

From: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DH_check return value test correct?
Date: 2006-05-13 01:02:26
Message-ID: 20060513010226.GA7806@winnie.fuhr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 06:39:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> > If $PGDATA/dh1024.pem exists and if SSL connections are enabled,
> > then each SSL connection logs the following:
> > DH_check error (dh1024.pem): No SSL error reported
> > The backend then loads the hardcoded parameters. The SSL connection
> > works, but with DH parameters other than intended.
>
> So it's not that surprising that no one noticed it was broken :-(

Incidentally, is it necessary to load the DH parameters anew and
call DH_check for every connection? The parameters don't change
and DH_check is fairly expensive: checking a 1024-bit parameter on
a 500MHz Pentium III takes about 260ms, which can be a significant
portion of the SSL handshake. The expense is probably negligible
on fast hardware but on older systems it makes connect times
noticeably slow (one of my test boxes is a 143MHz sparc Ultra 1;
DH_check takes almost 2 sec).

--
Michael Fuhr

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-05-13 01:03:17 Re: audit table containing Select statements submitted
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-05-13 00:38:07 Re: [GENERAL] Querying libpq compile time options