Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords

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: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
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.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-06-26 16:33:52
Subject: Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-06-26 16:30:11
Subject: Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group