Re: scram and \password

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: scram and \password
Date: 2017-03-13 17:05:39
Message-ID: CAMkU=1xdbeGMJFLwoqtOuK8jrUNebpMjzbQJ-Way6qVp3UM4TQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Should the \password tool in psql inspect password_encryption and act on
> it
> > being 'scram'?
>
> Not sure if it is wise to change the default fot this release.
>

I'm not proposing that we change the default value of password_encryption,
only that \password respect whatever value it currently finds there. But
after thinking about it a bit more, I reached the same conclusion that Joe
did, that it should use the same hashing method as the current password
does, and only consult password_encryption if there is no password
currently set.

> A patch among those lines would be a simple, do people feel that this
> should be part of PG 10?
>

I think it is pretty important to have some way of setting the password
that doesn't risk it ending up in the server log file, or .psql_history, or
having someone shoulder-surf it.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2017-03-13 17:10:48 Re: WIP: Faster Expression Processing v4
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-03-13 17:03:38 Re: PATCH: Configurable file mode mask