Re: Regarding SSL Enablement in PostgreSQL Database on different port

From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Regarding SSL Enablement in PostgreSQL Database on different port
Date: 2023-05-02 19:25:13
Message-ID: 08bd7e3f-5af8-d380-6ee6-4cacc5d0ac46@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 5/2/23 13:15, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
>
> Oh, I think your idea to use pgbouncer to take care of the SSL
> termination is elegant. I don't think me I'd characterize it as a hack
> if properly set up. Why do you consider it a hack?
> *t
>
>
>
Let me guess:  postgres IS NOT listening on the other port, pgbouncer is
with it's own users and mappings and protocol setup and then sending
what ever's  encrypted to the actual port postgres  is listening on
which could have been used directly (with maybe on less cert?)

I use pgbouncer btw.  For balance.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christophe Pettus 2023-05-02 19:26:02 Re: Regarding SSL Enablement in PostgreSQL Database on different port
Previous Message Tomas Pospisek 2023-05-02 19:15:08 Re: Regarding SSL Enablement in PostgreSQL Database on different port