Re: SSL over Unix-domain sockets

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> One thing to be aware of is /tmp cleaners ...
>>
>> ... but that would definitely be a problem. I think on most systems
>> you'd have to explicitly tweak the /tmp-cleaning script to know not to
>> zap such a link. Given that such a local customization would probably
>> disappear in your next system update, the security gain might be
>> fleeting.

> We could hack the postmaster so that it touches the /tmp socket
> (hardcoded path) in addition to the unix_socket_directory one.

That only saves you if the postmaster is running all the time;
which was an objection already made to several other schemes ...

regards, tom lane