| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: scram and \password |
| Date: | 2017-04-18 08:15:48 |
| Message-ID: | CANP8+jKHRSe4Hs0Um+p-VomPROe61XVwbL4Tbu-hsmDEUnahMQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 14 March 2017 at 15:40, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I was also thinking about that. Basically a primary method and a
>> fallback. If that were the case, a gradual transition could happen, and
>> if we want \password to enforce best practice it would be ok.
>
> Why exactly would anyone want "md5 only"? I should think that "scram
> only" is a sensible pg_hba setting, if the DBA feels that md5 is too
> insecure, but I do not see the point of "md5 only" in 2017. I think
> we should just start interpreting that as "md5 or better".
+1
As a potential open item, if we treat "md5" as ">= md5"
should we not also treat "password" as ">=password"?
It seems strange that we still support "password" and yet tell
everyonenot to use it.
I'd like PG10 to be the version where I don't have to tell people not
to use certain things, hash indexes, "password" etc.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2017-04-18 08:16:58 | Re: some review comments on logical rep code |
| Previous Message | Jan Michálek | 2017-04-18 08:13:57 | Re: Other formats in pset like markdown, rst, mediawiki |