From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Wolfgang Walther <walther(at)technowledgy(dot)de>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
Subject: | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |
Date: | 2025-04-08 18:25:20 |
Message-ID: | Z_VqEKXn6N_Rs4yI@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 02:11:19PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2025-04-08 13:02:11 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 06:57:18PM +0200, Wolfgang Walther wrote:
> > > Jacob Champion:
> > > > On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 9:32 AM Wolfgang Walther <walther(at)technowledgy(dot)de> wrote:
> > > > > And that should also not be a problem for distributions - they could offer a libpq and a libpq_oauth package, where only one of them can be installed at the same time, I guess? *
> > > > My outsider understanding is that maintaining this sort of thing
> > > > becomes a major headache, because of combinatorics. You don't really
> > > > want to ship a libpq and libpq-with-gss and libpq-with-oauth and
> > > > libpq-with-oauth-and-gss and ...
> > >
> > > That would only be the case, if you were to consider those other
> > > dependencies as "dangerous" as cURL. But we already depend on them. So if
> > > it's really the case that cURL is that much worse, that we consider loading
> > > it as a module... then the combinatorics should not be a problem either.
> > >
> > > However, if the other deps are considered problematic as well, then the ship
> > > has already sailed, and there is not point for a special case here anymore.
> >
> > Yes, I think this is what I am asking too. For me it was curl's
> > security reputation and whether that would taint the security reputation
> > of libpq. For Tom, I think it was the dependency additions.
>
> I'd say that curl's security reputation is higher than most of our other
> dependencies. We have dependencies for libraries with regular security issues,
> with those issues at times not getting addressed for prolonged amounts of
> time.
I see curl CVEs regularly as part of Debian minor updates, which is why
I had concerns, but if it is similar to OpenSSL, and better than other
libraries that don't even get CVEs, I guess it okay. However, is this
true for libpq libraries or database server libraries. Does it matter?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-04-08 18:39:45 | Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-04-08 18:11:19 | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |