Horton

Re: Rejecting weak passwords

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: jd@commandprompt.com
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, marcin mank <marcin.mank@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, mlortiz@uci.cu, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-09-29T11:43:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 15:59 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 15:52 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > > It takes about 32 hours to brute force all passwords from [a-zA-Z0-9]
> > > of up to 8 chars in length.
> > 
> > That would be a reason to limit the number of failed connection attempts
> > from a single source, then, rather than a reason to change the hash
> > function.
> > 
> > Hmmm, that would be a useful, easy (I think) security feature: add a GUC
> > for failed_logins_allowed.
> 
> Why a GUC, can't we just use ALTER ROLE (or ALTER DATABASE)?

If you make it a GUC, you get those for free.  (That's what the "U"
means.)