Re: Improve errors when setting incorrect bounds for SSL protocols

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improve errors when setting incorrect bounds for SSL protocols
Date: 2020-03-19 21:54:35
Message-ID: 6558A626-5E49-411F-B1ED-D48AF1BB1F9B@yesql.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 7 Feb 2020, at 01:33, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 11:30:40PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Or change to the v1 patch in this thread, which avoids the problem by doing it
>> in the OpenSSL code. It's a shame to have generic TLS functionality be OpenSSL
>> specific when everything else TLS has been abstracted, but not working is
>> clearly a worse option.
>
> The v1 would work just fine considering that, as the code would be
> invoked in a context where all GUCs are already loaded. That's too
> late before the release though, so I have reverted 41aadee, and
> attached is a new patch to consider with improvements compared to v1
> mainly in the error messages.

Having gone back to look at this, I can't think of a better way to implement
this and I think we should go ahead with the proposed patch.

In this message we aren't quoting the TLS protocol setting:
+ (errmsg("%s setting %s not supported by this build",
..but in this detail we are:
+ errdetail("\"%s\" cannot be higher than \"%s\"",
Perhaps we should be consistent across all ereports?

Marking as ready for committer.

cheers ./daniel

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-03-19 22:04:52 Re: Spurious "apparent wraparound" via SimpleLruTruncate() rounding
Previous Message Andres Freund 2020-03-19 21:38:19 Re: Berserk Autovacuum (let's save next Mandrill)