Re: RFC: Non-user-resettable SET SESSION AUTHORISATION

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
>> It might be a good idea to do something like this, but it's
>> significantly more complicated than a protocol-level SET SESSION
>> AUTHORIZATION.  Right now, you can never go backwards from an
>> authenticated state to an unauthenticated state, and there may be code
>> in the backend that relies on that in subtle ways.  The initial
>> bootstrap sequence is pretty complicated, and I'm pretty sure that any
>> naive attempt to redo that stuff is going to have unpleasant, probably
>> security-relevant bugs.
>
> What about the middle-ground of not doing de-auth right now? That eliminates
> your concerns but still allows getting rid of ugly things like copies of the
> password file (FWIW, my understanding is pgBouncer was meant more to run on
> the database server where you'd just point it at the native password file).

Uh, I don't have a clue what you mean when you say "the middle ground
of not doing de-auth right now".

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company