|From:||Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>|
|To:||Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>|
|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|
* Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us) wrote:
> 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.
See my recent email, think I clarified it well over there.
|Next Message||Stephen Frost||2021-05-25 21:25:36||Re: storing an explicit nonce|
|Previous Message||Stephen Frost||2021-05-25 21:22:43||Re: storing an explicit nonce|