Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | d57d3b74-be26-af08-956a-b095fd431a41@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq ("Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Add "password_protocol" connection parameter to libpq
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-08-11 21:46, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: > On 8/11/19 1:00 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On 2019-08-09 23:56, Jeff Davis wrote: >>> 1. Hierarchical semantics, where you specify the least-secure >>> acceptable method: >>> >>> password_protocol = {any,md5,scram-sha-256,scram-sha-256-plus} >> >> What would the hierarchy be if scram-sha-512 and scram-sha-512-plus are >> added? > > password_protocol = > {any,md5,scram-sha-256,scram-sha-512,scram-sha-256-plus,scram-sha-512-plus}? > > I'd put one length of digest over another, but I'd still rank a method > that uses channel binding has more protections than one that does not. Sure, but the opposite opinion is also possible. -- Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: