Re: Page-Level Encryption

From: Scott Marlowe <smarlowe(at)g2switchworks(dot)com>
To: David Blewett <david(at)dawninglight(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Page-Level Encryption
Date: 2006-01-20 20:37:19
Message-ID: 1137789439.25500.162.camel@state.g2switchworks.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 14:24, David Blewett wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is the right list for this message; if it's not,
> let me know and I'll take it up elsewhere. I found this thread today:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.databases.postgresql.hackers/browse_thread/thread/4587283b3b3a5aec>
>
> I would be very interested if it's possible to encrypt data in
> Postgres, at a lower level than individual columns but not as low as
> the filesystem. I.e., either be able to encrypt a single database or a
> single table but still be able to use normal SQL against it.
>
> I'm designing an IMAP server that will be using Peter Gutmann's
> Cryptlib to encrypt the message bodies using different keys for each
> user, and storing it as a binary large object in Postgres. However, I
> still would like to do full-text indexing of the mail. I would index
> the message, then encrypt it and store it in the database. This leaves
> the fulltext index open to attack, however. While the complete message
> would probably not be reproducible (someone correct me?), a significant
> portion of it probably could.
>
> Having the table containing the index, or the database object,
> encrypted would protect against system admins,

IF they've got root, and the unencrypted data or the password / key is
on the machine or in memory on it, you've lost. It may make it harder
for them to get it, but they can.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-01-20 20:44:59 Re: Page-Level Encryption
Previous Message David Blewett 2006-01-20 20:24:55 Page-Level Encryption