Re: pam auth - add rhost item
От | Grzegorz Sampolski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pam auth - add rhost item |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 56814DF2.6040805@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pam auth - add rhost item (Grzegorz Sampolski <grzsmp@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pam auth - add rhost item
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi. I send new patch: https://github.com/grzsmp/postgres/commit/3e3a1f187b71acef3f8dc0745da753fb5be821fa On 12/27/2015 05:31 PM, Grzegorz Sampolski wrote: > Hi there! > I'm alive and working on new patch. > So, I takes into account all suggestions from Tomas and I'll > add additional parameter `usedns' with `yes/no' values to pass > resolved hostname or ip address through rhost_item. > > On 12/24/2015 03:35 AM, Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:53 AM, Tomas Vondra >> <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Actually, one more thing - the patch should probably update the docs too, >>> because client-auth.sgml currently says this in the "auth-pam" section: >>> >>> <para> >>> ... >>> PAM is used only to validate user name/password pairs. >>> ... >>> </para> >>> >>> I believe that's no longer true, because the patch adds PAM_RHOST to the >>> user/password fields. >>> >>> Regarding the other PAM_* fields, none of them strikes me as very useful for >>> our use case. >>> >>> In a broader sense, I think this patch is quite desirable, despite being >>> rather simple (which is good). I certainly don't agree with suggestions that >>> we can already do things like this through pg_hba.conf. If we're providing >>> PAM authentication, let's make it as complete/useful as possible. In some >>> cases modifying PAM may not be feasible - e.g. some management systems rely >>> on PAM as much as possible, and doing changes in other ways is a major >>> hassle. >> There is no input from the author for more than 1 month, I have marked >> the patch as returned with feedback because of a lack of activity.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: