From: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Victor Drobny <v(dot)drobny(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Authentification method on client side checking |
Date: | 2017-07-10 00:29:01 |
Message-ID: | 66e45d75-b076-849b-9a49-6d4796da5572@8kdata.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/07/17 18:47, Victor Drobny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Despite the addition of SCRAM authentification to PostgreSQL 10, MITM
> attack can be performed by saying that the server supports, for
> example, only md5 authentication. The possible solution for it is
> checking authentification method on a client side and reject
> connections that could be unsafe.
>
> Postgresql server can require unencrypted password passing, md5,
> scram, gss or sspi authentification.
Hi Victor.
Precisely yesterday I initiated a similar thread:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/d4098ef4-2910-c8bf-f1e3-f178ba77c381%408kdata.com
I think that a) the mere auth mechanism is not enough (channel
binding or not, ssl or not, change a lot the effective security
obtained) and b) maybe a categorization is a better way of specifying a
connection security requirements.
What's your opinion on this? Any answer should also be coordinated
among the drivers.
Álvaro
--
Álvaro Hernández Tortosa
-----------
<8K>data
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-07-10 01:14:05 | Re: Fix header comment of streamutil.c |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-07-09 23:02:15 | Re: COPY vs. transition tables |