Re: Channel binding for post-quantum cryptography

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Filip Janus <fjanus(at)redhat(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Subject: Re: Channel binding for post-quantum cryptography
Date: 2025-10-31 20:57:36
Message-ID: CAOYmi+khx0=unNhquZyKCCg6AMmnaqvyOZ7V2w0ps0VrONnN+A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 2:26 AM Filip Janus <fjanus(at)redhat(dot)com> wrote:
> While fixing the actual issue will take some time, I’ve fixed the requested test.
> Since I’m still quite new to the PG community, would it make sense to propose a patch that only adds the test?

You mean like in a TODO: block in the test? Maybe, but in my opinion
the damage to configure alone is not worth the benefit for this case,
until the test is passing. (And if OpenSSL were to change to provide a
digest through its API, as briefly mentioned in the IETF discussion,
the new test might not actually test any new code.)

--Jacob

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Jones 2025-10-31 21:00:51 Re: display hot standby state in psql prompt
Previous Message Jacob Champion 2025-10-31 20:30:52 Re: Support getrandom() for pg_strong_random() source