| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: How come drongo didn't fail authentication here? |
| Date: | 2022-07-28 14:36:53 |
| Message-ID: | 073260f1-e1a1-d4c4-5c99-73c10d35c09f@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-07-28 Th 10:24, Tom Lane wrote:
> In commits 7c34555f8/e1bd4990b, I added a new role used by a TAP
> script but neglected the auth_extra incantation needed to allow
> login as that role. This should have resulted in SSPI auth
> failures on certain Windows configurations, and indeed it did
> on drongo's next run in the v15 branch:
>
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=drongo&dt=2022-07-27%2022%3A01%3A47
>
> However, its immediately-following run on HEAD succeeded,
> though I'd obviously not had time to put in the fix yet:
>
> https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=drongo&dt=2022-07-27%2022%3A30%3A27
>
> How can that be? Have we somehow broken SSPI authentication
> in HEAD?
>
>
Nothing is broken. On HEAD drongo uses Unix sockets.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-07-28 14:55:21 | Re: How come drongo didn't fail authentication here? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-07-28 14:33:08 | Re: replacing role-level NOINHERIT with a grant-level option |