Horton

Re: Letting the client choose the protocol to use during a SASL exchange

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Date: 2017-04-06T17:05:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 04/06/2017 08:13 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> If any SCRAM open item is a beta blocker, it's this one.  (But SASLprep is
> also in or near that status.)  Post-beta wire protocol changes are bad,
> considering beta is normally the time for projects like pgjdbc and npgsql to
> start adapting to such changes.
>
> [Action required within three days.  This is a generic notification.]
>
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item.

I will work on this next week. I haven't given it much thought yet, but 
I think it's going to be pretty straightforward. It won't require much 
code yet, as we only support one SASL mechanism. We just need to ensure 
that we don't paint ourselves in the corner with the protocol.

- Heikki

Commits

  1. Improve the SASL authentication protocol.

  2. Refactor libpq authentication request processing.

  3. Minor cleanup of backend SCRAM code.