Message-ID: <4BBA6924.5050305@joeconway.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 15:50:12 -0700
From: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20071019 Fedora/1.5.0.12-3.fc6 pango-text
	Thunderbird/1.5.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
CC: Timothy Madden <terminatorul@gmail.com>,
	Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>, pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Database level encryption
References: <q2y5078d8af1004030635g624bf8f7r580cb3ebe7135b74@mail.gmail.com>
	<4BB774D4.3070306@joeconway.com>
	<m2r5078d8af1004051330n1874e532u3c88fd1bc31c8697@mail.gmail.com>
	<v2ldcc563d11004051334ledfcd2b2gf8db60ca48b43118@mail.gmail.com>
	<4BBA05E80200002500030493@gw.wicourts.gov>
In-Reply-To: <4BBA05E80200002500030493@gw.wicourts.gov>
OpenPGP: id=B699434A
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="------------enigBF2C67937C1E42F7C5D33689"

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigBF2C67937C1E42F7C5D33689
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 04/05/2010 01:46 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Timothy Madden <terminatorul@gmail.com> wrote:
> =20
>>> My scenario is how to protect the database if the machine is
>>> stolen (it is a mini-laptop), and I would like to encrypt the
>>> entire database, that is all columns of all tables, and if
>>> possible everything else found in the database.
>>>
>>> I would like all searching and sorting functions, just like with
>>> a normal database (that is, transparent encryption for the
>>> application level). The password will be entered by a human in
>>> order to start the application.
> =20
>> Everything you've said so far points to using a mounted encrypted
>> drive to store the db.
> =20
> Agreed.  I know you explicitly said you didn't want to use that in
> your original post, but you didn't say why.  I don't think you're
> going to convince anyone here to put effort into something you can
> configure to "just work" with so little trouble on existing systems,
> without a really good argument.

Agreed here also. I don't see any reason for Postgres to provide this
sort of functionality when it can be done at the OS level. There is
going to be a significant performance hit -- that is why I would suggest
careful analysis and selective encryption instead. But if that isn't
important, an encrypted drive is probably the only option.

Joe


--------------enigBF2C67937C1E42F7C5D33689
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=s3Us
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--------------enigBF2C67937C1E42F7C5D33689--