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


From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>,Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, 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(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc,Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS
Date: 2006-12-30 19:28:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
* Joshua D. Drake (jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com) wrote:
> > The reason I wanted to use PGP is that I already have a PGP key. X.509
> > certificates are far too complicated (a certificate authority is a
> > useless extra step in my case).
> Complete side note but one feature that I brought up to my team a
> potentially useful would be to allow the use of ssh keys for
> authentication.
> SSH keys are far more prevalent, and they are understood even at the
> medium corporate level.

While this may be true it's certainly also true that X.509 keys are
understood at both the medium corporate level and mid-level gov't (at
least in the US), especially inside the DOD, where they've been
mandated, as I recall.



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jim C. NasbyDate: 2006-12-30 19:35:05
Subject: Re: Sync Scan update
Previous:From: Stephen FrostDate: 2006-12-30 19:26:17
Subject: Re: TODO: GNU TLS

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