Re: BUG #4340: SECURITY: Is SSL Doing Anything?
От | Dan Kaminsky |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #4340: SECURITY: Is SSL Doing Anything? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 48AB2E8C.8020602@doxpara.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #4340: SECURITY: Is SSL Doing Anything? (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #4340: SECURITY: Is SSL Doing Anything?
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
>> 1) No roots (but still works for some unknown reason) >> 2) Explicitly configured corporate roots >> 3) Explicitly configured corporate roots, AND global roots >> 4) Global roots (but still works for some unknown reason) >> >> Keep in mind that at least Debian distributes a ca-certificates package, >> and I can't imagine they're alone. >> > > My guess is you'll find both options 1 and 2 fairly often, and 3 and 4 > very seldom. > (Note that if you configure libpq for no roots, it will accept any > certificate without verifying the chain) > So, if you do nothing special, it's #1? Sounds like the path of least resistance is no security. Uh oh. > That's one of the things, yeah, agreed. I meant the internals part only > as an argument for why you'll see most pg deployments not using global > certs. > > OTOH, if your firewall lets your clients (or even worse - your webserver > or so) connect out to arbitrary machines on the PostgreSQL port, it can > easily be argued that you have a lot of homework to do elsewhere as well > ;-) But that's just a mitigating factor, and not a solution. > > It's hard enough to manage inbound firewall rules. Outbound? Fuggetaboutit :) --Dan
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: