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

Re: default SSL compression (was: libpq compression)

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>,Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: default SSL compression (was: libpq compression)
Date: 2013-01-01 19:00:55
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 04:29:35PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:41 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 11:45:54PM +0800, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > Uh. We have the ! notation in our default *now*. What openssl also
> > > supports is the text "DEFAULT", which is currently the equivalent of
> > > "ALL!aNULL!eNULL". The question, which is valid of course, should be
> > > if "DEFAULT" works with all openssl versions.
> > >
> > > It would seem reasonable it does, but I haven't investigated.

The oldest version readily available for download (0.9.1c, 1998) has it.

> > Do we want to change our ssl_ciphers default to 'DEFAULT'?  Currently it
> >
> Did we ever get anywhere with this? Is this a change we want to do for 9.3?
> Since nobody seems to have come up with a motivation for not following the
> openssl default, we probably should?

+1 for doing that.  I'm not aware of a PostgreSQL-specific selection criterion
for SSL cipher suites.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2013-01-01 23:48:03
Subject: Re: dynamic SQL - possible performance regression in 9.2
Previous:From: Boszormenyi ZoltanDate: 2013-01-01 18:26:14
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make pg_basebackup configure and start standby [Review]

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group