Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords
От | Jim Mercer |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20010626003824.M1599@reptiles.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 12:20:40AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > We will do double-crypt and everyone will be happy, right? > > > if the API as above existed, then i would be happy to see "password" go away > > (although it should be depreciated to a --enable option, otherwise you are > > going to ruin a bunch of existing code). > > Who is using it? We can continue to allow it but at some point there is > no purpose to it unless you have clients that are pre-7.2. Double-crypt > removes the use for it, no? if the API allows a plain text password, and compares agains a cyrtpo-pg_shadow i would imagine that would be fine. at this point i should apologize for possibly arguing out of turn. if 7.2 has the above, that is cool. i'm sorta hoping my mods can make it into 7.1.3, if there is one. > > i recognize that some of this can be done with the ident mapping facility, > > but again, that is an external file, and thus presents management issues. > > Our authentication system is already too complex. I would prefer not to > make it more so. The more complex, the more mistakes admins make. understood, but you were asking for comments. 8^) -- [ Jim Mercer jim@reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 ] [ Now with more and longer words for your reading enjoyment. ]
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: