| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SCRAM salt length |
| Date: | 2017-08-17 14:23:46 |
| Message-ID: | b3b07184-eb1f-0e91-8dee-a3a05e1a1ef8@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/17/17 09:21, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> The RFC doesn't say anything about salt
> length, but the one example in it uses a 16 byte string as the salt.
> That's more or less equal to the current default of 12 raw bytes, after
> base64-encoding.
The example is
S: r=rOprNGfwEbeRWgbNEkqO%hvYDpWUa2RaTCAfuxFIlj)hNlF$k0,
s=W22ZaJ0SNY7soEsUEjb6gQ==,i=4096
That salt is 24 characters and 16 raw bytes.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-08-17 14:28:23 | Re: SCRAM salt length |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2017-08-17 14:19:24 | Re: [HACKERS] [postgresql 10 beta3] unrecognized node type: 90 |