From: | Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Shaun Thomas <shaun(dot)thomas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Logging of matching pg_hba.conf entry during auth skips trust auth, potential security issue |
Date: | 2023-08-21 17:49:16 |
Message-ID: | CAAWbhmhp3FOu5cNCpqcgqLnA7az-aTjrpRP6Du1AAi2QjN0qMg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 4:58 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Attached is a v3 to do these two things, with adjustments for two SSL
> tests. Any objections about it?
(Sorry for the long weekend delay.) No objections; you may want to
adjust the comment above the test block in t/001_password.pl, as well.
I will ask -- more as a rhetorical question than something to resolve
for this patch, since the topic is going to come back with a vengeance
for OAuth -- what purpose the consistency here is serving. If the OP
wants to notice when a connection that should be using strong
authentication is not, is it helpful to make that connection "look the
same" in the logs? I understand we've been carrying the language
"trust authentication method" for a long time, but is that really the
only hang-up, or would there be pushback if I tried to change that
too, sometime in the future?
Thanks,
--Jacob
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2023-08-21 18:01:01 | Re: cataloguing NOT NULL constraints |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2023-08-21 16:08:43 | Re: [17] Special search_path names "!pg_temp" and "!pg_catalog" |