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

Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>

From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>, Antonin Houska <ah@cybertec.at>, 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: 2019-06-16T16:42:55Z
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.

On 6/16/19 9:45 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 07:07:20AM -0400, Joe Conway wrote:
>> In any case it doesn't address my first point, which is limiting the
>> volume encrypted with the same key. Another valid reason is you might
>> have data at varying sensitivity levels and prefer different keys be
>> used for each level.
> 
> That seems quite complex.


How? It is no more complex than encrypting at the tablespace level
already gives you - in that case you get this property for free if you
care to use it.

Joe

-- 
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development