Re: storing an explicit nonce

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Ants Aasma <ants@cybertec.at>, Sasasu <i@sasa.su>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-10-07T19:47:19Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Rethink method for assigning OIDs to the template0 and postgres DBs.

  2. pg_upgrade: Preserve database OIDs.

  3. pg_upgrade: Preserve relfilenodes and tablespace OIDs.

  4. Fix for new Boolean node

  5. Improve error handling of HMAC computations

  6. Add macro RelationIsPermanent() to report relation permanence

  7. Enhance nbtree index tuple deletion.

On Thu, Oct  7, 2021 at 03:38:58PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Now none of that is to say that we shouldn't limit risk - I mean less
> > risk is always better than more. But we need to be sure this is not
> > like a 90% thing, where we're pretty sure it works. We can get by with
> > that for a lot of things, but I think here we had better try
> > extra-hard to make sure that we don't have any exposures. We probably
> > will anyway, but at least if they're just bugs and not architectural
> > deficiencies, we can hope to be able to patch them as they are
> > discovered.
> 
> As long as we're clear that this initial version of TDE is with XTS then
> I really don't think we'll end up with anyone showing up and saying we
> screwed up by not generating a per-page nonce to store with it- the point
> of XTS is that you don't need that.

I am sold.  ;-)

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.