Re: initdb recommendations

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Date: 2019-05-24T02:30:09Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-docs
Greetings,

* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
> > For now I have left in the password based method to be scram-sha-256 as
> > I am optimistic about the support across client drivers[1] (and FWIW I
> > have an implementation for crystal-pg ~60% done).
> 
> > However, this probably means we would need to set the default password
> > encryption guc to "scram-sha-256" which we're not ready to do yet, so it
> > may be moot to leave it in.
> 
> > So, thinking out loud about that, we should probably use "md5" and once
> > we decide to make the encryption method "scram-sha-256" by default, then
> > we update the recommendation?
> 
> Meh.  If we're going to break things, let's break them.  Set it to
> scram by default and let people who need to cope with old clients
> change the default.  I'm tired of explaining that MD5 isn't actually
> insecure in our usage ...

+many.

Thanks,

Stephen

Commits

  1. initdb: Change authentication defaults