Re: [HACKERS] Server ignores contents of SASLInitialResponse
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Server ignores contents of SASLInitialResponse |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqTqytzGryms4zJb8xZ98YkMs==3ntMBf-mvjNK_SqEj0g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Server ignores contents of SASLInitialResponse (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Server ignores contents of SASLInitialResponse
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, I don't think that we are completely done here. Using the > patch of upthread to enforce a failure on SASLInitialResponse, I see > that connecting without SSL causes the following error: > psql: FATAL: password authentication failed for user "mpaquier" > But connecting with SSL returns that: > psql: duplicate SASL authentication request > > I have not looked at that in details yet, but it seems to me that we > should not take pg_SASL_init() twice in the scram authentication code > path in libpq for a single attempt. Gotcha. This happens because of sslmode=prefer, on which pqDropConnection is used to clean up the connection state. So it seems to me that the correct fix is to move the cleanup of sasl_state to pqDropConnection() instead of closePGconn(). Once I do so the failures are correct, showing to the user two FATAL errors because of the two attempts: psql: FATAL: password authentication failed for user "mpaquier" FATAL: password authentication failed for user "mpaquier" -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: