pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Victor Wagner <vitus@wagner.pp.ru>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 09:13:09 +0300
Message-ID: <20161109091309.6437a8b3@fafnir.local.vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB7nPqTxH8Nnvo0ii4w6881cT3OODgJcE7RFk-WaS+mYD-7pyg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAB7nPqSL_V+0nD5i-XH_x1o5HTt2bT53vVwPUTHz8YT0hYRoPg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB7nPqQzQnO11P_j1rEOzFjMRYNiDsAkzAbt111Srs-EONb9Zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB7nPqRevzWkivfXZxpsBeKXhyUgHR+41mWKs78Fu=7srYFg4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<f606bf4d-6791-1b3a-a7e9-b676544b7f75@pgmasters.net>
	<CAB7nPqRhhJGhEeQn8omtS0x2s5YyjEuAtV1vdPt-7WVuC6OpcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<79774ac1-df34-6b20-1659-c020c3842ce1@iki.fi>
	<f28a48ef-cc89-3de6-131e-3d32e7267d4c@iki.fi>
	<CAB7nPqTxyM+3YbQuevYVZ9MzCBYFAyzSqH2Pk5BaRBy-4GdjfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB7nPqS6Pfz5+3CieROcXRUDRN41bZ274JfGiTMfhZtKku2HDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB7nPqRy3krN8quR9XujMVVHYtXJ0_60nqgVc6oUk8ygyVkZsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4f3a9e71-cb1b-ca44-a780-36d503671e45@iki.fi>
	<CAB7nPqRW5JvH8jj+zNjBL72EYDyj3qPdNGYWvuHNq9-BR63R_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<d60f8ddb-3ba5-2402-8951-7ae23ba0974b@iki.fi>
	<CAB7nPqQpek5pUUinmZNMr+n9+vgaUqaxZJ9zWRoMKM8e1uHRHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAB7nPqTxH8Nnvo0ii4w6881cT3OODgJcE7RFk-WaS+mYD-7pyg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 16:35:27 +0900
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:

 Hi
> Attached is a rebased patch set for SCRAM, with the following things:
> - 0001, moving all the SHA2 functions to src/common/ and introducing a
> PG-like interface. No actual changes here.

It seems, that client nonce generation in this patch is not
RFC-compliant.

RFC 5802 states that SCRAM nonce should be

a sequence of random printable ASCII
      characters excluding ','

while this patch uses sequence of random bytes from pg_strong_random
function with zero byte appended.

It could cause following problems

1. If zero byte happens inside random sequence, nonce would be shorter
than expected, or even empty.

2. If one of bytes happens to be ASCII Code of comma, than server
to the client-first message, which includes copy of client nonce,
appended by server nonce,
as one of unquoted comman-separated field, would be parsed incorrectly.


Regards, Victor
-- 

		



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



view thread (149+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <20161109091309.6437a8b3@fafnir.local.vm>
Permalink:  ../20161109091309.6437a8b3@fafnir.local.vm/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/20161109091309.6437a8b3@fafnir.local.vm

 · 

reply
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-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: vitus@wagner.pp.ru
  Subject: Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol
  In-Reply-To: <20161109091309.6437a8b3@fafnir.local.vm>

* 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