| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] SSL and Encryption |
| Date: | 2017-11-03 05:12:53 |
| Message-ID: | CAMkU=1yiNq_S6-iULaMS-ciHmxBWc4TzpNQG2gCRsGgb7zYkaQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 9:58 PM, John R Pierce <pierce(at)hogranch(dot)com> wrote:
> On 11/2/2017 9:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> The SCRAM discussion is spread across two threads mainly with hundreds
> of emails, which may discourage even the bravest. Here are links to
> the important documentation:https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/auth-methods.html#auth-password
>
> so that says... ... [scram-sha-256] is the most secure of the currently
> provided methods, but it is not supported by older client libraries....
>
> whats the state of the more popular bindings now? jdbc, python native,
> etc ?
>
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/List_of_drivers
What is 'python native'? psycopg works as long you update your libpq.
Cheers,
Jeff
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John R Pierce | 2017-11-03 05:22:50 | Re: [HACKERS] SSL and Encryption |
| Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2017-11-03 04:58:00 | Re: [HACKERS] SSL and Encryption |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John R Pierce | 2017-11-03 05:22:50 | Re: [HACKERS] SSL and Encryption |
| Previous Message | John R Pierce | 2017-11-03 04:58:00 | Re: [HACKERS] SSL and Encryption |