Re: pg_authid.rolpassword format (was Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol)
David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
From: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Julian Markwort <julian.markwort@uni-muenster.de>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Valery Popov <v.popov@postgrespro.ru>
Date: 2016-12-20T23:29:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 06:14:40PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > David, > > * David Fetter (david@fetter.org) wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 08:34:19AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > > > * Heikki Linnakangas (hlinnaka@iki.fi) wrote: > > > > Even if you have a separate "verifier type" column, it's not fully > > > > normalized, because there's still a dependency between the > > > > verifier and verifier type columns. You will always need to look > > > > at the verifier type to make sense of the verifier itself. > > > > > > That's true- but you don't need to look at the verifier, or even > > > have *access* to the verifier, to look at the verifier type. > > > > Would a view that shows only what's to the left of the first semicolon > > suit this purpose? > > Obviously a (security barrier...) view or a (security definer) function > could be used, but I don't believe either is actually a good idea. Would you be so kind as to help me understand what's wrong with that idea? Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
Commits
-
Support SCRAM-SHA-256 authentication (RFC 5802 and 7677).
- 818fd4a67d61 10.0 landed
-
Refactor SHA2 functions and move them to src/common/.
- 273c458a2b3a 10.0 landed
-
Replace isMD5() with a more future-proof way to check if pw is encrypted.
- dbd69118c05d 10.0 landed
-
Remove bogus notice that older clients might not work with MD5 passwords.
- 7e3ae5455948 9.2.20 landed
- 470af1f41c8b 9.3.16 landed
- ada2cdb61015 9.4.11 landed
- 65a7f190b253 9.5.6 landed
- 7546c135dc30 9.6.2 landed
- 31c54096a18f 10.0 landed
-
Refactor the code for verifying user's password.
- e7f051b8f9a6 10.0 landed
-
Replace PostmasterRandom() with a stronger source, second attempt.
- fe0a0b5993df 10.0 landed
-
Remove support for (insecure) crypt authentication.
- 53a5026b5cb3 8.4.0 cited