| From: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq |
| Date: | 2019-08-11 19:46:46 |
| Message-ID: | 75dff08d-12cd-9e85-97ec-d7db55e224a7@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/11/19 1:00 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-08-09 23:56, Jeff Davis wrote:
>> 1. Hierarchical semantics, where you specify the least-secure
>> acceptable method:
>>
>> password_protocol = {any,md5,scram-sha-256,scram-sha-256-plus}
>
> What would the hierarchy be if scram-sha-512 and scram-sha-512-plus are
> added?
password_protocol =
{any,md5,scram-sha-256,scram-sha-512,scram-sha-256-plus,scram-sha-512-plus}?
I'd put one length of digest over another, but I'd still rank a method
that uses channel binding has more protections than one that does not.
Jonathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-08-11 19:56:50 | Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq |
| Previous Message | Stephan Doliov | 2019-08-11 19:36:10 | Table inheritance and column ordering question |