Horton

Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS)

Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>

View thread
From: Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope@jackdb.com>, Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>, "Moon, Insung" <Moon_Insung_i3@lab.ntt.co.jp>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2019-08-17T06:16:06Z
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. Revamp the WAL record format.

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 09:01:05PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> > > Why would it not be simpler to have the cluster_passphrase_command run
> > > whatever command-line program it wants?  If you don't want to use a
> > > shell command, create an executable and call that.
> > 
> > Having direct integration with a KMS would certainly be valuable, and I
> > don't see a reason to deny users that option if someone would like to
> > spend time implementing it- in addition to a simpler mechanism such as a
> > passphrase command, which I believe is what was being suggested here.
> 
> OK,  I am just trying to see why we would not use the
> cluster_passphrase_command-like interface to do that.

One problem that occurs to me is that PG may need to send some sort of
credentials to the KMS. If it runs a separate process to execute the command,
it needs to pass those credentials to it. Whether it does so via parameters or
environment variables, both can be seen by other users.

-- 
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com