| From: | Bowen Shi <zxwsbg12138(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in scram_SaltedPassword loop. |
| Date: | 2023-11-23 04:05:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAM_vCufzLucPevjOC90cVD_AsPtpPHRLY2w+Zm985B-6JHxz1w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> I don't think it would be useful to limit this at an arbitrary point,
iteration
> count can be set per password and if someone wants a specific password to
be
> super-hard to brute force then why should we limit that?
I agree with that. Maybe some users do want a super-hard password.
RFC 7677 and RFC 5802 don't specify the maximum number of iterations.
> If we want to add CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS inside the loop I think a brief
> comment would be appropriate.
This has been completed in patch v2 and it's ready for review.
Regards
Bowen Shi
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2_0001-Add-CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS-in-scram_SaltedPassword-loo.patch | application/x-patch | 1.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2023-11-23 04:09:43 | Re: Lockless exit path for ReplicationOriginExitCleanup |
| Previous Message | Ray Eldath | 2023-11-23 04:00:26 | Re: Adding a clang-format file |