Re: reducing our reliance on MD5

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: José Luis Tallón <jltallon(at)adv-solutions(dot)net>
Cc: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: reducing our reliance on MD5
Date: 2015-02-11 15:40:48
Message-ID: 5165.1423669248@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgTHVpcyBUYWxsw7Nu?= <jltallon(at)adv-solutions(dot)net> writes:
> In any case, just storing the "password BLOB"(text or base64 encoded)
> along with a mechanism identifier would go a long way towards making
> this part pluggable... just like we do with LDAP/RADIUS/Kerberos/PAM today.

That's exactly the direction we must NOT go.

Upgrading the security of stored passwords in pg_authid is at least as
important as upgrading the wire protocol security; very possibly more so.
Any solution that requires cleartext passwords to be kept by the server
is simply not going to be accepted.

Because of this constraint, I really suspect that we have zero chance of
achieving pluggability or farming out the problem to some third party
library.

Or in short: we've done that before, with LDAP/RADIUS/Kerberos/PAM,
and none of those solutions have proven very satisfactory; they certainly
have not replaced passwords to any measurable degree. Expecting the next
external solution to do so is the definition of insanity.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message José Luis Tallón 2015-02-11 15:54:10 Re: reducing our reliance on MD5
Previous Message Claudio Freire 2015-02-11 15:34:21 Re: reducing our reliance on MD5