Re: Patch to include PAM support...

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Dominic J(dot) Eidson" <sauron(at)the-infinite(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch to include PAM support...
Date: 2001-06-12 18:44:08
Message-ID: 12956.992371448@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Because (a) it greatly increases the scope of the vulnerability,

> How? It is just a new authentication method with the same problems as
> our current ones.

No, it is not *a* new authentication method, it is an open interface
that could be plugged into almost anything. We need the top-level
postmaster process to be absolutely reliable; plugging into "almost
anything" is not conducive to reliability.

Besides, an hour ago you were ready to reject this patch for lack of
interest. Why are you suddenly so eager to ignore the risks and apply
it anyway?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-06-12 18:57:00 Re: Patch to include PAM support...
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2001-06-12 18:34:29 Re: Re: REPLACE INTO table a la mySQL

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-06-12 18:57:00 Re: Patch to include PAM support...
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-06-12 18:31:58 Re: Patch to include PAM support...