From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Marco van Eck <marco(dot)vaneck(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Have an encrypted pgpass file |
Date: | 2018-07-18 21:52:04 |
Message-ID: | 5743.1531950724@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:46 AM, Marco van Eck <marco(dot)vaneck(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Since .pgpass files contain plain-text passwords, I searched for an
>> alternative.
>> In the attached patch I've added the possibility to run a command to produce
>> the content of the pgpass file, in exactly the same format.
> ... Here you side step those questions completely and make that the end
> user's problem. I like it.
... but doesn't this just encourage people to build hacks that aren't
really any more secure than the unreadable-file approach? In fact,
I'm afraid this would be an attractive nuisance, in that people would
build one-off hacks that get no security vetting and don't really work.
I'd like to see a concrete example of a use-case that really does add
security; preferably one short and useful enough to put into the docs
so that people might copy-and-paste it rather than rolling their own.
It seems possible that something of the sort could be built atop
ssh-agent or gpg-agent, for instance.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-07-18 22:13:11 | Re: GSOC 2018 Project - A New Sorting Routine |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2018-07-18 21:42:40 | Re: YA race condition in 001_stream_rep.pl (was Re: pgsql: Allow using the updated tuple while moving it to a different par) |