Re: [HACKERS] Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8328.1492013344@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation
Re: [HACKERS] Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> writes: > On 04/12/2017 06:26 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> How does it do that? > Good question, crypto magic? I don't know the details, but the basic > idea is that you extract a blob of data that uniquely identifies the TLS > connection. Using some OpenSSL functions, in this case. I think it's a > hash of some of the TLS handshake messages that were used when the TLS > connection was established (that's what "tls-unique" means). That data > is then incorporated in the hash calculations of the SCRAM > authentication. If the client and the server are not speaking over the > same TLS connection, they will use different values for the TLS data, > and the SCRAM computations will not match, and you get an authentication > failure. ... which the user can't tell apart from having fat-fingered the password, I suppose? Doesn't sound terribly friendly. A report of a certificate mismatch is far more likely to lead people to realize there's a MITM. So this seems more like a hack than like a feature we need so desperately as to push it into v10 post-freeze. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: