Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq
Date: 2019-08-12 17:46:41
Message-ID: f433a63f-802d-bb29-7df7-8cb6e80bdc43@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-08-12 19:26, Tom Lane wrote:
> What problem do we actually need to solve here?
>
> If the known use-case is just "don't send my password in the clear",
> maybe we should just change libpq to refuse to do that, ie reject
> plain-password auth methods unless SSL is on (except maybe over
> unix sockets?). Or invent a bool connection option that enables
> exactly that.

There are several overlapping problems:

1) A downgrade attack by a malicious server. The server can collect
passwords from unsuspecting clients by just requesting some weak
authentication like plain-text or md5. This can currently be worked
around by using SSL with server verification, except when considering
the kind of attack that channel binding is supposed to address.

2) A downgrade attack to evade channel binding. This cannot currently
be worked around.

3) A user not wanting to expose a weakly hashed password to the
(otherwise trusted) server. This cannot currently be done.

4) A user not wanting to send a password in plain text over the wire.
This can currently be done by requiring SSL.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2019-08-12 17:49:31 Re: Problem with default partition pruning
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-08-12 17:45:09 Re: Problem with default partition pruning