Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks

Greetings,

* Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us) wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 10:09:31AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm not sure that it's quite so simple. Perhaps we should also drop
> > LDAP and I don't really think PAM was ever terribly good for us to have,
> > but at least PAM and RADIUS could possibly be used with OTP solutions
> > (and maybe LDAP? Not sure, don't think I've seen that but perhaps..),
> > rendering sniffing of what's transmitted less valuable. We don't
> > support that for 'password' itself or for 'md5' in any serious way
> > though.
>
> I thought all the plain-password methods were already using SSL
> (hopefully with certificate authentication) and they were therefore
> safe. Why would we remove something like LDAP if that is what the site
> is already using?

We don't require SSL to be used with them..? Further, as already
discussed on this thread, SSL only helps with on-the-wire, doesn't
address the risk of a compromised server. LDAP, in particular, is
terrible in this regard because it's a centralized password system,
meaning that one compromised server will lead to an attacker gaining
full access to the victim's account throughout the enterprise.

Thanks,

Stephen