Re: OpenSSL key renegotiation with patched openssl
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: OpenSSL key renegotiation with patched openssl |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9837222c0911301321g724291efw821dc74d5640486a@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: OpenSSL key renegotiation with patched openssl (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: OpenSSL key renegotiation with patched openssl
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2009/11/27 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> The discussion I saw suggested that you need such a patch at both ends. > >> and likely requires a restart of both postgresql and slony afterwards... > > Actually, after looking through the available info about this: > https://svn.resiprocate.org/rep/ietf-drafts/ekr/draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate.txt > I think my comment above is wrong. It is useful to patch the > *server*-side library to reject a renegotiation request. Applying that > patch on the client side, however, is useless and simply breaks things. I haven't looked into the details but - is there a point for us to remove the requests for renegotiation completely? Will this help those that *haven't* upgraded their openssl library? I realize it's not necessarily our bug to fix, but if we can help.. :) If a patched version of openssl ignores the renegotiation anyway, there's nothing lost if we turn it off in postgresql, is there? -- Magnus HaganderMe: http://www.hagander.net/Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: