From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Welty <rwelty(at)averillpark(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: - what protocol for an Internet postgres |
Date: | 2003-05-14 17:22:27 |
Message-ID: | 3EC27B53.7050503@mascari.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Richard Welty wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2003 11:54:49 -0500 Fernando Flores Prior <fprior(at)tlaloc(dot)imta(dot)mx> wrote:
>
>>Now I have a better vision of what can be accomplished with the
>>options that you gave me.
>
>
>>At 12:37 p.m. 14/05/2003 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>>However, from a security standpoint I don't think there's any question
>>>that you want to use SSL encryption for any database connection that
>>>passes over the open Internet. I seem to recall that the ODBC driver
>>>(still) doesn't support SSL --- if so, that would be reason enough not
>>>to use it. Or to invest the effort to fix it.
>
>
> i just caught the end of this.
>
> if for some reason you need to use a driver that doesn't support SSL (say,
> the aforementioned ODBC driver) there may be tunneling options that can be
> made to work, using tools such as ssh, stunnel, or IPSec.
>
> those are really more network engineering/sysadmin things than postgresql
> things, and the appropriate method will vary depending on circumstances.
If I recall correctly, ComandPrompt Inc. (www.commandprompt.com) sells
an SSL-enabled ODBC driver. I've never used it though...
Mike Mascari
mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | greg | 2003-05-14 17:31:18 | Re: fomatting an interval (resend) |
Previous Message | Doug McNaught | 2003-05-14 17:18:05 | Re: Status reporting for COPY |