| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib promotion? |
| Date: | 2006-07-14 16:37:19 |
| Message-ID: | 27943.1152895039@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't see a strong need for moving pgcrypto into core, and there's at
>> least one argument against it: if someone needs a crypto-free version of
>> postgres for use someplace with benighted laws, they would be screwed.
> Doesn't our inclusion of md5() pretty much blow that argument away?
No: md5 is hashing, not encryption. The difference is that you can't
retrieve the original plaintext from a hash. That is a very large
difference in the eyes of most munitions laws --- encryption is useful
for spies, hashing not so much.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-07-14 16:39:37 | Re: Forcing wal rotation |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-07-14 16:32:23 | Re: contrib promotion? |