Re: Channel binding not supported using scram-sha-256 passwords

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Hugh Ranalli <hugh(at)whtc(dot)ca>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Channel binding not supported using scram-sha-256 passwords
Date: 2019-02-26 14:16:19
Message-ID: 4b0c2616-967e-356e-fff8-99f4177ff08f@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 2019-02-22 06:28, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Is that right? Won't we then just select nothing if the macro is not
>> defined?
> In the context of an SSL connection, the server would send both SCRAM
> and SCRAM_PLUS as valid mechanisms if it supports channel binding
> (HAVE_BE_TLS_GET_CERTIFICATE_HASH). If the server does not support
> channel binding, then only SCRAM is sent.

After reading it again a few more times, I think your patch is correct.

I tried reproducing the issue locally, but the required OpenSSL version
is too old to be easily available.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-02-26 14:57:35 Re: LDAP authenticated session terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault, PostgresSQL server terminates other active server processes
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2019-02-26 12:24:21 Re: LDAP authenticated session terminated by signal 11: Segmentation fault, PostgresSQL server terminates other active server processes