From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Lars Kanis <kanis(at)comcard(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] user mapping extension to pg_ident.conf |
Date: | 2009-07-24 19:20:46 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070907241220u588d6575n5a8571072ac84313@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Magnus Hagander<magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 14:53, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>>>> Yup, you would need a protocol change that would allow the client to
>>>> change its mind about what the username was after it got the auth
>>>> challenge. And then what effects does that have on username-sensitive
>>>> pg_hba.conf decisions? We go back and change our minds about the
>>>> challenge type, perhaps? The whole thing seems like a nonstarter to me.
>>
>>> "challenge type"? Not sure I understand what you are referring to here.
>>
>> The point is that pg_hba.conf allows the selection of auth method to
>> depend on username. What happens if, after being told auth method is
>> (say) Kerberos, the client comes back and wants to use a different
>> username that should have resulted in a different auth method according
>> to pg_hba.conf? It's not hard to construct scenarios where that would
>> be seen as a security breach.
>
> Oh. Now I get it. Good point. Forgot about the username being part of
> that. Yeah, that basicalliy says it has to be a client-side
> implementation only.
I believe this means that this patch is rejected, so I am marking it
as such on commitfest.postgresql.org. However, it sounds like there
would be room for a client-side patch offering functionality in this
area, if Lars or someone else wanted to develop such a thing for a
future CommitFest.
Hopefully I've understood the situation correctly...
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-07-24 19:33:53 | Re: Multicore builds on MSVC |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2009-07-24 19:07:25 | Multicore builds on MSVC |