Re: [HACKERS] Is "trust" really a good default?

>>> The only part of this discussion that I'd really be prepared=20
>>> to buy into
>>> is the part about *if* you use -W or --pwfile, then set up
>pg_hba.conf
>>> with MD5 as the default auth (because that's probably what the user
>>> wants anyway).
>
>> Ok. Here is a patch that does this.
>
>... and rather severely mangles the comments, too;

Um, no, it doesn't. At least not on my installation.

> not to mention the
>more basic problem that the comments will now be wrong.

That, however, it is correct :-( Sloppy.

How about a text along the line of:
CAUTION: Configuring the system for "trust" authentication allows any
local user to connect using any PostgreSQL user name, including the
superuser, over either Unix domain sockets or TCP/IP. If you are on
a multiple-user machine, this is probably not good. Change it to use
something other than "trust" authentication.

Or something along that line? Since it would no longer actually be
default. Or do we want something like "On some installations, the
default is..."?

//Magnus