From: | Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)rice(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(dot)aasma(at)eesti(dot)ee>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WIP: Data at rest encryption |
Date: | 2017-06-14 13:13:57 |
Message-ID: | 20170614131357.GC11767@e733.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > While I agree that configuring full disk encryption is not technically
> > difficult, it requires much more privileged access to the system and
> > basically requires the support of a system administrator. In addition,
> > if a volume is not available for encryption, PostgreSQL support for
> > encryption would still allow for its data to be encrypted and as others
> > have mentioned can be enabled by the DBA alone.
>
> Frankly I'm having difficulties imagining when it could be a real
> problem. It doesn't seem to be such a burden to ask a colleague for
> assistance in case you don't have sufficient permissions to do
> something. And I got a strong feeling that solving bureaucracy issues of
> specific organizations by changing PostgreSQL core in very invasive way
> (keeping in mind testing, maintaining, etc) is misguided.
In the same time implementing a plugable storage API and then implementing
encrypted / compressed / whatever storage in a standalone extension using
this API seems to be a reasonable thing to do.
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-06-14 13:44:47 | Re: RemoveSubscriptionRel uses simple_heap_delete |
Previous Message | Aleksander Alekseev | 2017-06-14 13:05:09 | Re: WIP: Data at rest encryption |