Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 11:00:26 +0200
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Robbie Harwood <rharwood@redhat.com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
 PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
 Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] GSSAPI encryption support
Message-ID: <20151022090026.GB8952@awork2.anarazel.de>
References: <jlg1tcw6owo.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAMsr+YH0jamGmOM=mwziYQg=J-0XVp4BosPEv1n+UMaNMj4aMA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151016133459.GL3685@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <CAMsr+YG1+HQ-V_kdBKkFX+XRV+bND0pJOygns-nbAuHEn2pj2w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151017021105.GP3685@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <jlgwpuin3fm.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAB7nPqT+URED7yZUPc_Soj=vfhf_r7MJD7=VonWpOFiiJE6zgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAB7nPqTL1SjaYn7pwb86mW1M+469=ofyyRt1Oh9dyFC_bAf_iw@mail.gmail.com>
 <jlgbnbskwya.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <CAB7nPqSRFG=U3Q_R-7FPvMjNH4TsGfTdZPa7c6x868iw_h0cvw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAB7nPqSRFG=U3Q_R-7FPvMjNH4TsGfTdZPa7c6x868iw_h0cvw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

On 2015-10-22 16:47:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Hm, and that's why you chose this way of going. My main concern about
> this patch is that it adds on top of the existing Postgres protocol a
> layer to encrypt and decrypt the messages between server and client
> based on GSSAPI. All messages transmitted between client and server
> are changed to 'g' messages on the fly and switched back to their
> original state at reception. This is symbolized by the four routines
> you added in the patch in this purpose, two for frontend and two for
> backend, each one for encryption and decryption. I may be wrong of
> course, but it seems to me that this approach will not survive
> committer-level screening because of the fact that context-level
> things invade higher level protocol messages.

Agreed. At least one committer here indeed thinks this approach is not
acceptable (and I've said so upthread).

Greetings,

Andres Freund


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers