|From:||Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>|
|To:||Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>|
|Cc:||Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Kincaid <tomjohnkincaid(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Subject:||Re: storing an explicit nonce|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 05:14:24PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us) wrote:
> > Yes, I can see that happening. I think occasional leakage of hint bit
> > changes to be acceptable. We might decide they are all acceptable.
> I don't think that I agree with the idea that this would ultimately only
> leak the hint bits- I'm fairly sure that this would make it relatively
> trivial for an attacker to be able to deduce the contents of the entire
> 8k page. I don't know that we should be willing to accept that as a
> part of regular operation (which we generally view crashes as being). I
> had thought there was something in place to address this though. If
> not, it does seem like there should be.
Uh, can you please explain more? Would the hint bits leak? In another
email you said hint bit leaking was OK.
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
|Next Message||Bruce Momjian||2021-05-25 21:17:25||Re: storing an explicit nonce|
|Previous Message||Stephen Frost||2021-05-25 21:15:55||Re: storing an explicit nonce|