| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Julian Markwort <julian(dot)markwort(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Valery Popov <v(dot)popov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol |
| Date: | 2016-09-27 13:48:24 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqT2pULV4VhBVKQ70QNJpcVe7fuk_9DdqNnC-HXWxQmDKQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> The libpq-side is not. Just calling random() won't do. We haven't needed for
> random numbers in libpq before, but now we do. Is the pgcrypto solution
> portable enough that we can use it in libpq?
Do you think that urandom would be enough then? The last time I took a
look at that, I saw urandom on all modern platforms even those ones:
OpenBSD, NetBSD, Solaris, SunOS. For Windows the CryptGen stuff would
be nice enough I guess..
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-27 13:49:20 | Re: Make flex/bison checks stricter in Git trees |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2016-09-27 13:42:58 | Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol |