Re: "could not accept SSPI security context"

From: Ahmed Shinwari <ahmed(dot)shinwari(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Brar Piening <brar(at)gmx(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: "could not accept SSPI security context"
Date: 2011-02-24 10:37:49
Message-ID: AANLkTi=FiYCo=XsF6pD3wxMZBKGX-veaYS_XJ849VYGN@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Brar Piening <brar(at)gmx(dot)de> wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 07:58:46 -0800 (PST), Ahmed <ahmed(dot)shinwari(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> I tried changing that one line to use UTF-8 encoder, but the password
>> packet
>> didn't get fixed. It works smoothly if kept in byte array instead of
>> string.
>>
> Yes, as SSPI uses binary bytes we have to avoid to convert them to
> characters and back to bytes during message generation.
>
> While "char *buffer" in C can serve as both a string and a buffer of binary
> bytes, we have "byte[]" as binary buffer and "string" as string in c#.
> This is the reason why we need to use byte[] in all places where libpq uses
> char* without really caring whether there is a string inside or some opaque
> bytes.
>
>
> I think changing the AuthenticationSSPI case to use context.Host may break
>> the cases Brar's mentioned.
>>
> If this isn't necessary to fix the problem we should probably get some more
> instight to what really happens here before fixing one end and breaking the
> other.
>
I agree.

For now, Francisco may check in that part which fixes the bug due to
encoding. And, address the later issue after further investigation.

>
> Regards,
>
> Brar
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sim Zacks 2011-02-24 11:35:38 Re: ldap authentication multiple ou objects
Previous Message tv 2011-02-24 09:40:46 Re: database is bigger after dump/restore - why? (60 GB to 109 GB)