From: | Louis Bertrand <louis(at)bertrandtech(dot)on(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Gene Sokolov <hook(at)aktrad(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Hashing passwords (was Updated TODO list) |
Date: | 1999-07-09 15:14:41 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.10.9907091510060.15560-100000@tronix.bertrandtech.on.ca |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
No, I am not suggesting PostgreSQL bundle any strong crypto: simply take
advantage of what's available native on the host OS.
BTW, the US export controls only apply to code written in the US. The
Wassenaar Arrangement specifically excludes free/open software.
Ciao
--Louis <louis(at)bertrandtech(dot)on(dot)ca>
Louis Bertrand http://www.bertrandtech.on.ca
Bertrand Technical Services, Bowmanville, ON, Canada
Tel: +1.905.623.8925 Fax: +1.905.623.3852
OpenBSD: Secure by default. http://www.openbsd.org/
On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Gene Sokolov wrote:
> Once you say "strong encryption", you also say "export controls", "wasenaar"
> and "avoid it if you can". It means PgSQL team would have to maintain two
> distributions - one for the US and one for the rest of the world. It's not
> like it cannot be done. I just see no benefit in using encryption instead of
> hashing. There is no need for DES or Blowfish to justify the pain.
>
> Gene Sokolov.
>
>
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas | 1999-07-09 16:01:15 | Re: [HACKERS] Arbitrary tuple size |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1999-07-09 15:02:12 | Re: [HACKERS] "24" < INT_MIN returns TRUE ??? |