Re: Replace current implementations in crypt() and gen_salt() to OpenSSL

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: "Koshi Shibagaki (Fujitsu)" <shibagaki(dot)koshi(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Replace current implementations in crypt() and gen_salt() to OpenSSL
Date: 2024-02-16 12:57:56
Message-ID: bdf58b2c-71da-4129-bb63-e6c4f62051ad@eisentraut.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 16.02.24 10:16, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> 2. The crypt() and gen_salt() methods built on top of them (modes of operation, kind of) are not FIPS-compliant.
> I wonder if it's worth trying to make pgcrypto disallow non-FIPS compliant
> ciphers when the compiled against OpenSSL is running with FIPS mode enabled, or
> raise a WARNING when used? It seems rather unlikely that someone running
> OpenSSL with FIPS=yes want to use our DES cipher without there being an error
> or misconfiguration somewhere.

I wonder on what level this kind of check would be done. For example,
the password hashing done for SCRAM is not FIPS-compliant either, but
surely we don't want to disallow that. Maybe this should be done on the
level of block ciphers. So if someone wanted to add a "crypt-aes"
module, that would then continue to work.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Rowley 2024-02-16 13:02:20 Re: BUG #18348: Inconsistency with EXTRACT([field] from INTERVAL);
Previous Message jian he 2024-02-16 12:54:16 Re: POC, WIP: OR-clause support for indexes