Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3252.993569271@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Encrypting pg_shadow passwords (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > The only reason to add double-crypt is so we can continue to use > /etc/passwd entries on systems that use crypt() in /etc/passwd. In the long run, though, we want to drop crypt(3) usage entirely. It's just too much of a pain in the neck to depend on the C library's crypt(), for two reasons: 1. It's not in libc on all systems, leading to constant problems when linking clients, particularly with shared libraries that have to have a dependency on another shared library because of this. (Search the archives for problems about "can't find crypt". There are many such reports.) 2. crypt() isn't guaranteed compatible across platforms, meaning that your clients may be unable to log in anyway. See for example http://fts.postgresql.org/db/mw/msg.html?mid=57516 Using our own MD5 (or whatever) code will avoid these problems. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: