Re: storing an explicit nonce

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
Date: 2021-05-25 21:16:00
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
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