Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?

On 2015-06-24 15:41:22 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/24/15 3:13 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Meh. The relevant branches already exist, as you can disable it today.
> > 
> > We could also just change the default in the back branches.
> 
> One more argument for leaving everything alone.  If users don't like it,
> they can turn it off themselves.

Because it's so obvious to get there from "SSL error: unexpected
message", "SSL error: bad write retry" or "SSL error: unexpected record"
to disabling renegotiation. Right?  Search the archives and you'll find
plenty of those, mostly in relation to streaming rep. It took -hackers
years to figure out what causes those, how are normal users supposed to
a) correlate such errors with renegotiation b) evaluate what do about
it?