Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 130e2ca6a081e8352d21d386efd54d7329849e45.camel@j-davis.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 2019-09-17 at 16:04 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > basically maps into checking after FE_SCRAM_FINISHED. Instead of > those two flags, wouldn't it be cleaner to add an extra routine to > fe-auth-scram.c which does the same sanity checks, say > pg_fe_scram_check_state()? This needs to be careful about three > things, taking in input an opaque pointer to fe_scram_state if > channel > binding is required: > - The data is not NULL. > - The sasl mechanism selected is SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS. > - The state is FE_SCRAM_FINISHED. Yes, I think this does come out a bit cleaner, thank you. > What do you think? There is no need to save down the connection > parameter value into fe_scram_state. I'm not sure I understand this comment, but I removed the extra boolean flags. > Nit here as there are only two mechanisms handled: I would rather > cause the error if the selected mechanism does not match > SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS, instead of complaining if the selected mechanism > matches SCRAM-SHA-256. Either way is actually fine :) Done. > + printfPQExpBuffer(&conn->errorMessage, > + libpq_gettext("Channel binding required but > not > offered by server\n")); > + result = false; > Should that be "completed by server" instead? Done. > is required". Or you have in mind that this error message is better? I felt it would be a more useful error message. > I think that pgindent would complain with the comment block in > check_expected_areq(). Changed. Regards, Jeff Davis
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: