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


From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>,"Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>,Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date: 2006-12-30 19:26:17
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* Magnus Hagander (magnus(at)hagander(dot)net) wrote:
> mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 30, 2006 at 06:05:14PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> >> Except tht X.509 is already done (in a sense). The client can supply a
> >> certificate that the server can check, and vice-versa. You can't link
> >> this with the postgresql username yet, but I havn't seen any proposals
> >> about how to do that.
> > 
> > I suggest associating the SHA-1 fingerprint with the ROLE. I would love
> > to have this.
> I would suggest a map based on the CN. Any org with a centralized PKI
> infrastructure is likely to assign certs with the userid or other unique
> identifier in the CN.

Right, this would be how I'd envision it as well.  Basically provide a
CA which you trust and then a way to map from DN/CN to PostgreSQL users
(perhaps similar to the ident mapping in implementation?).  I'd *also*
like to support full certificate matching (not just the fingerprint...)
but I think doing DN/CN would be a good, easier, first step.



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2006-12-30 19:28:10
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2006-12-30 19:22:59
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group