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
-
initdb: Change authentication defaults
- 09f08930f0f6 13.0 landed