From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL JDBC List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [JDBC] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256 |
Date: | 2017-06-06 15:35:49 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYH=T1Hp9p0n3aT6b=A5kjtTb1GmwXDiGTtoLz3coWe9Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 2:32 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> At the end,
>>> everything has been rejected as Postgres enforces the use of the
>>> newest one when doing the SSL handshake.
>>
>> TLS implementations, or TLS versions? What does the TLS version have
>> to do with this issue?
>
> I really mean *version* here.
I don't think it's true that we force the latest TLS version to be
used. The comment says:
/*
* We use SSLv23_method() because it can negotiate use of the highest
* mutually supported protocol version, while alternatives like
* TLSv1_2_method() permit only one specific version. Note
that we don't
* actually allow SSL v2 or v3, only TLS protocols (see below).
*/
IIUC, this is specifically so that we don't force the use of TLS 1.2
or TLS 1.1 or TLS 1.0.
It could well be that there's something I don't understand here.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Hale Boyes | 2017-06-06 15:37:10 | Re: sketchy partcollation handling |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2017-06-06 15:31:21 | Re: Extra Vietnamese unaccent rules |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-06-06 16:21:02 | Re: [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256 |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-06-06 12:29:25 | Re: [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256 |