Re: [HACKERS] On-disk format of SCRAM verifiers

On 21 April 2017 at 14:20, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 21 April 2017 at 10:20, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
>>> But looking more closely, I think I misunderstood RFC 5803. It *does* in
>>> fact specify a single string format to store the verifier in. And the format
>>> looks like:
>>>
>>> SCRAM-SHA-256$<iteration count>:<salt>$<StoredKey>:<ServerKey>
>>
>> Could you explain where you are looking? I don't see that in RFC5803
>
> From 1.  Overview:
>
>    Syntax of the attribute can be expressed using ABNF [RFC5234].  Non-
>    terminal references in the following ABNF are defined in either
>    [AUTHPASS], [RFC4422], or [RFC5234].
>
>        scram-mech     = "SCRAM-SHA-1" / scram-mech-ext
>                       ; Complies with ABNF for <scheme>
>                       ; defined in [AUTHPASS].
>
>        scram-authInfo = iter-count ":" salt
>                       ; Complies with ABNF for <authInfo>
>                       ; defined in [AUTHPASS].
>
>        scram-authValue = stored-key ":" server-key
>                       ; Complies with ABNF for <authValue>
>                       ; defined in [AUTHPASS].
>
> Thanks,

The above text, which I've already read, does not explain the
suggested change from : to $.

Could you explain?

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services