Re: Exposure related to GUC value of ssl_passphrase_command

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Moon, Insung" <tsukiwamoon(dot)pgsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Exposure related to GUC value of ssl_passphrase_command
Date: 2020-02-12 17:37:29
Message-ID: CAHGQGwHBpkaMYkaYfFGbMO9sLrQ=2WyH3yB3uPCfEKsjUQjLzw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 4:24 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 5:15 PM Moon, Insung <tsukiwamoon(dot)pgsql(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Deal Hackers.
> >
> > The value of ssl_passphrase_command is set so that an external command
> > is called when the passphrase for decrypting an SSL file such as a
> > private key is obtained.
> > Therefore, easily set to work with echo "passphrase" or call to
> > another get of passphrase application.
> >
> > I think that this GUC value doesn't contain very sensitive data,
> > but just in case, it's dangerous to be visible to all users.
> > I think do not possible these cases, but if a used echo external
> > commands or another external command, know what application used to
> > get the password, maybe we can't be convinced that there's the safety
> > of using abuse by backtracking on applications.
> > So I think to the need only superusers or users with the default role
> > of pg_read_all_settings should see these values.
> >
> > Patch is very simple.
> > How do you think about my thoughts like this?
>
> I'm hardly an expert on this topic, but reading this blog post about
> ssl_passphrase_command:
>
> https://www.2ndquadrant.com/en/blog/postgresql-passphrase-protected-ssl-keys-systemd/
>
> which mentions that some users might go with the very naive
> configuration such as:
>
> ssl_passphrase_command = 'echo "secret"'
>
> maybe it makes sense to protect its value from everyone but superusers.
>
> So +1.

Seems this proposal is reasonable.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emre Hasegeli 2020-02-12 17:49:14 Re: In PG12, query with float calculations is slower than PG11
Previous Message Christopher Browne 2020-02-12 17:32:27 Re: Just for fun: Postgres 20?