Re: password_encryption default

From: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: password_encryption default
Date: 2020-05-25 15:57:19
Message-ID: 3c6509e5-1d3d-423f-08b5-fc50df89c9e6@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 5/25/20 5:45 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2020-05-22 23:23, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>>> Yeah.  But there's still something to Jonathan's argument, because 9.6
>>> will go EOL in November 2021, which is pretty close to when v14 will
>>> reach public release (assuming we can hold to the typical schedule).
>>> If we do it in v13, there'll be a full year where still-supported
>>> versions of PG can't do SCRAM, implying that clients would likely
>>> fail to connect to an up-to-date server.
>>
>> ^ that's what I meant.
>
> Here is a proposed patch for PG14 then.

This makes me happy :D

I took a look over, it looks good. One question on the initdb.c diff:

- if (strcmp(authmethodlocal, "scram-sha-256") == 0 ||
- strcmp(authmethodhost, "scram-sha-256") == 0)
- {
- conflines = replace_token(conflines,
- "#password_encryption = md5",
- "password_encryption = scram-sha-256");
- }
-

Would we reverse this, i.e. if someone chooses authmethodlocal to be
"md5", we would then set "password_encryption = md5"?

Thanks,

Jonathan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vik Fearing 2020-05-25 16:01:07 Re: Since '2001-09-09 01:46:40'::timestamp microseconds are lost when extracting epoch
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2020-05-25 15:25:45 Re: Failure to create GiST on ltree column