| From: | teg(at)redhat(dot)com (Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?=) |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jim Mercer <jim(at)reptiles(dot)org>, Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
| Date: | 2001-06-26 16:33:00 |
| Message-ID: | xuyd77rqk03.fsf@halden.devel.redhat.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > > For the same reason I don't see any value in the idea of adding
> > > > crypt-based double encryption to clients. We don't really want to
> > > > support that over the long run, so why put effort into it?
> > >
> > > The only reason to add double-crypt is so we can continue to use
> > > /etc/passwd entries on systems that use crypt() in /etc/passwd.
> >
> > Haven't many systems (at least Linux and FreeBSD) switched from this
> > to other algorithms as default, like MD5? (and usually found in /etc/shadow)
>
> Yes, most BSD's are MD5. I wasn't sure about Linux.
Most recent (3-4 years and newer) use PAM, which can use MD5 as an
underlying module.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-26 16:33:52 | Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-26 16:30:11 | Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |