Re: Remove one use of IDENT_USERNAME_MAX

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Remove one use of IDENT_USERNAME_MAX
Date: 2019-10-29 07:10:28
Message-ID: eedd3c43-ed87-3c84-de36-07a83ca94265@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-10-28 14:45, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> At Sat, 26 Oct 2019 08:55:03 +0200, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote in
>>> IDENT_USERNAME_MAX is the maximum length of the information returned
>>> by an ident server, per RFC 1413. Using it as the buffer size in peer
>>> authentication is inappropriate. It was done here because of the
>>> historical relationship between peer and ident authentication. But
>>> since it's also completely useless code-wise, remove it.
>
>> In think one of the reasons for the coding is the fact that *pw is
>> described to be placed in the static area, which can be overwritten by
>> succeeding calls to getpw*() functions.
>
> Good point ... so maybe pstrdup instead of using a fixed-size buffer?

Maybe. Or we just decide that check_usermap() is not allowed to call
getpw*(). It's just a string-matching routine, so it doesn't have any
such business anyway.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Konstantin Knizhnik 2019-10-29 08:04:52 Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2019-10-29 07:06:57 Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum