Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords
Date: 2001-08-16 17:06:45
Message-ID: 10332.997981605@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I don't follow this argument. You added a config option that toggles
> whether to use the old crypt(3) method or the new md5 method.

?? If the config option works like that, I think it's wrong. There
shouldn't *be* a config option, unless it's one that turns off MD5
because the platform hasn't got int64 support. An MD5-enabled server
or client must still be able to do crypt too, in order to speak to
older clients or servers.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-08-16 17:09:32 Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2001-08-16 17:05:24 Re: Re: Proposal for encrypting pg_shadow passwords