Re: On-disk format of SCRAM verifiers

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: On-disk format of SCRAM verifiers
Date: 2017-04-21 13:20:56
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQtcC-PiBFsisBubSSNquFxGnyMAdkpaWj5q4ym84+ocw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 21 April 2017 at 10:20, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
>> But looking more closely, I think I misunderstood RFC 5803. It *does* in
>> fact specify a single string format to store the verifier in. And the format
>> looks like:
>>
>> SCRAM-SHA-256$<iteration count>:<salt>$<StoredKey>:<ServerKey>
>
> Could you explain where you are looking? I don't see that in RFC5803

From 1. Overview:

Syntax of the attribute can be expressed using ABNF [RFC5234]. Non-
terminal references in the following ABNF are defined in either
[AUTHPASS], [RFC4422], or [RFC5234].

scram-mech = "SCRAM-SHA-1" / scram-mech-ext
; Complies with ABNF for <scheme>
; defined in [AUTHPASS].

scram-authInfo = iter-count ":" salt
; Complies with ABNF for <authInfo>
; defined in [AUTHPASS].

scram-authValue = stored-key ":" server-key
; Complies with ABNF for <authValue>
; defined in [AUTHPASS].

Thanks,
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-04-21 13:21:48 Re: On-disk format of SCRAM verifiers
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2017-04-21 13:08:33 Old versions of Test::More