Re: Allowing SSL connection of v11 client to v10 server with SCRAM channel binding

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Allowing SSL connection of v11 client to v10 server with SCRAM channel binding
Date: 2017-11-30 05:36:58
Message-ID: CAB7nPqRQ1oq1H9P=2A2w+YoK3Axoo_dnjweWKmvXTSwTCsF9zg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 1:04 AM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 11/22/17 21:08, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Yes, agreed. This patch looks good to me. In fe-auth-scram.c, it would
>> be also nice to add a comment to keep in sync the logics in
>> build_client_first_message() and build_client_final_message() which
>> assign the cbind flag value.
>
> Could you clarify what comment you would like to have added or changed?

Sure. Here is with the attached patch what I have in mind. The way
cbind-flag is assigned in the client-first message should be kept
in-sync with the way the client-final message builds the binding data
in c=. It could be possible to add more sanity-checks based on
assertions by keeping track of the cbind-flag assigned in the
client-first message as your upthread patch is doing in the backend
code, but I see a simple comment as a sufficient reminder.
--
Michael

Attachment Content-Type Size
fe-auth-scram-comment.patch text/x-patch 680 bytes

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2017-11-30 05:39:30 Re: Commit fest 2017-11
Previous Message Tsunakawa, Takayuki 2017-11-30 05:29:14 RE: Commit fest 2017-11