From: Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Subject: Re: Possible to store invalid SCRAM-SHA-256 Passwords
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:19:30 -0400
Message-ID: <43882bd7-a002-dd50-bf9a-401560285485@postgresql.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190423065701.GL2712@paquier.xyz>
References: <4240a41f-a957-fd7d-7c24-31683f259b9d@postgresql.org>
<20190422015051.GA3433@paquier.xyz>
<3033.1555940554@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<5a93333c-dde6-ee52-f870-4dccfc50eb6f@postgresql.org>
<30284.1555972921@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<15140775-08c3-45bd-6dab-fdcd290d1bf0@postgresql.org>
<20190423010142.GE2712@paquier.xyz>
<10698.1555981849@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<265876b8-1a72-89cd-bdcf-e641d93e166c@postgresql.org>
<20190423021018.GF2712@paquier.xyz>
<20190423065701.GL2712@paquier.xyz>
On 4/23/19 2:57 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 11:10:18AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> That's a hard morning... Yes you are right and I can see the failure.
>> By the way, grouping everything in one patch looks more adapted to me
>> as this tightens all the checks for the different verifier types.
>
> The afternoon has been better. I have double-checked your patch and
> committed it down to v10.
Thanks!
> Now, there are two things which may need
> extra handling:
> - Do we add a note in the release notes about that with a SQL query
> checking the state of pg_authid?
Hmm...well, let's sound it out:
- If you have an invalid SCRAM-SHA-256 password (e.g.
SCRAM-SHA-256$1234), you would have been unable to log in anyway, so in
all likelihood you would either have had an admin reset your password,
or you gave up.
- If you had a md5 hash with bogus characters in it, it'd be the above
as well
So likely it's been resolved in some way: the user has been issued a new
password or has given up on PostgreSQL
With that said, we could do something like:
"To determine if this release affects an of your users ability to log in
using either the SCRAM-SHA-256 on MD5 password based methods, you can
run the following query:
<query that finds the now invalid hashes>
We advise that you reset the passwords for these users.
"
> - In ~9.6 we include in md5.h a macro which does not care about hex
> characters in the MD5 hash. I think that we should fix that as well,
> or perhaps that's not worth caring per the lack of complaints?
> Attached is what would be needed.
+1 for fixing so its consistent (at least from a behavior standpoint).
I confirmed that it's in 9.5 & 9.4 as well.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Attachments:
[application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (832B, ../43882bd7-a002-dd50-bf9a-401560285485@postgresql.org/2-signature.asc)
download
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Cc: jkatz@postgresql.org, michael@paquier.xyz, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sfrost@snowman.net
Subject: Re: Possible to store invalid SCRAM-SHA-256 Passwords
In-Reply-To: <43882bd7-a002-dd50-bf9a-401560285485@postgresql.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox