From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Rejecting weak passwords |
Date: | 2009-09-28 11:35:03 |
Message-ID: | 4AC09F67.2090301@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Albe Laurenz wrote:
> Dear hackers,
>
> I have been thinking about ways to have PostgreSQL reject
> weak passwords.
>
> I think the standard recommendation is "use PAM and LDAP",
> but that requires the user to change the password outside
> of PostgreSQL. And who would want to setup and maintain an
> LDAP server just for this?
>
> Since everybody has different ideas what is a good password,
> there should be some way to configure that. I've looked at
> how Oracle does it, and they simply let you write a
> stored procedure that throws an exception if it doesn't
> like the password.
> Since users are on cluster level and functions live in
> databases, that won't work in PostgreSQL.
>
> I have come up with an idea or two and like to hear your
> opinion.
>
> 1) One could have a set of GUCs like min_password_length,
> min_password_nonchars and similar that everybody
> could configure. This is not extremely flexible though.
> 2) Another idea would be a GUC that contains a regular
> expression that a password may *not* match.
> Perhaps that's too limiting too.
> 3) I have also considered a GUC that points to a loadable
> module that performs the password check if set.
>
>
>
My vote is for #3, if anything.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-09-28 11:46:37 | Re: syslog_line_prefix |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2009-09-28 10:51:37 | Re: syslog_line_prefix |