|From:||Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>|
|To:||Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: [PATCH] Fixed malformed error message on malformed SCRAM message.|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 06/08/2017 03:07 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 11:48 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
>> On 06/02/2017 09:32 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
>>>> BTW, since you mention COMMERROR uses in auth.c, isn't the usage at
>>>> line 687 wrong? It sure looks like the author supposed that that
>>>> ereport call wouldn't return, but it will. Adjacent similar calls
>>>> clean up and return NULL.
>>> Probably, though one could argue for proceeding with the short password.
>>> Deserves a comment if log-only is intentional.
>> Let's turn it into an ERROR.
> Shouldn't that portion be back-patched?
Yeah, perhaps. But since it's not actively broken, nothing particularly
bad happens with the code as it is, I think I'm not going to bother.
>>> The lack of an exit after COMMERROR "client selected an invalid SASL
>>> authentication mechanism" looks like a bug.
>> Yes. That was fixed in commit 505b5d2f86 already.
>> Taking all the comments in this thread into account, and a few more things
>> that I spotted while looking at the error messages, I came up with the
>> attached patch. It includes the changes from Michael's patch upthread to use
>> errdetail() in the SCRAM errors, and it turns the protocol violation errors
>> in auth.c from COMMERROR into ERROR. See commit message for more details.
>> Barring objections, I'll push this tomorrow.
> Thanks for the new version. No additional comments from me.
Ok, committed, thanks!
|Next Message||Noah Misch||2017-06-09 06:09:51||Re: BUG #14682: row level security not work with partitioned table|
|Previous Message||Tom Lane||2017-06-08 14:10:39||Re: using WHERE and AND in SELECT|
|Next Message||'Andres Freund'||2017-06-08 17:07:22||Re: PostgreSQL 10 changes in exclusion constraints - did something change? CASE WHEN behavior oddity|
|Previous Message||Robert Haas||2017-06-08 16:56:10||Re: Adding support for Default partition in partitioning|