Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:41:19 -0400
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Ants Aasma <ants.aasma@eesti.ee>,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Data at rest encryption
Message-ID: <20170614214119.GL1769@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: <20170613172459.GL3151@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <20170613174329.GK13873@momjian.us>
 <20170613182339.GP3151@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <20170613182910.GN13873@momjian.us>
 <20170613183858.GR3151@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <20170613185622.GO13873@momjian.us>
 <20170613192011.GS3151@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <a2fa2930-5334-c926-01ee-4a01c605b7a4@2ndquadrant.com>
 <20170613221104.GT3151@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <9cea5160-c64b-0b9e-d4b7-c57db2a696be@2ndquadrant.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="TxukmIqg3MmZ0Kmh"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9cea5160-c64b-0b9e-d4b7-c57db2a696be@2ndquadrant.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org


--TxukmIqg3MmZ0Kmh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Peter,

* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 6/13/17 18:11, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> Let's see a proposal in those terms then.  How easy can you make it,
> >> compared to existing OS-level solutions, and will that justify the
> >> maintenance overhead?
> > From the original post on this thread, which included a WIP patch:
> >=20
> > ----------------------------------
> > Usage
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> >=20
> > Set up database like so:
> >=20
> >     (read -sp "Postgres passphrase: " PGENCRYPTIONKEY; echo;
> >      export PGENCRYPTIONKEY
> >      initdb -k -K pgcrypto $PGDATA )
> >=20
> > Start PostgreSQL:
> >=20
> >     (read -sp "Postgres passphrase: " PGENCRYPTIONKEY; echo;
> >      export PGENCRYPTIONKEY
> >      postgres $PGDATA )
> > ----------------------------------
>=20
> Relying on environment variables is clearly pretty crappy.  So if that's
> the proposal, then I think it needs to be better.

I don't believe that was ever intended to be the final solution, I was
just pointing out that it's what the WIP patch did.

The discussion had moved into having a command called which provided the
key on stdout, as I recall, allowing it to be whatever the user wished,
including binary of any kind.

If you have other suggestions, I'm sure they would be well received.  As
to the question of complexity, it certainly looks like it'll probably be
quite straight-forward for users to use.

Thanks!

Stephen

--TxukmIqg3MmZ0Kmh
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJZQa1/AAoJEO1sijiDR2RVc/wP/iUNe9wE0WIGLrNbck6U8Epl
pTfeWgJ+cQ40LH/fswS0qgbaU5OyudMpRdmgo4wtF53t8otnRhFoCBJUntujxYZ0
UqMcavBsowuh1iIr11BEZNb4qG2PVUAsBWyg9Sj9e1L8EJBd+JAZFcW3WwLCNIK1
qXliu708m//pe09RJFV9jfLNGzqYjVce0/w4OxTC9+OK0mDSgQiWZYgEzGN7H4ZQ
PnWGmhudg3vYL0jwwjQ/qnONdsc4Db6oTaSOyOTDU6kR428D4x2JP1bwQh5/ctFp
uh77vRcXesF1Mg6EG9ra1QIKj6Ww924opiA7ELu61LeAZh59G3ZWm4grzmiYHVDO
PTJshOW2BywBkvuItd7haf4yVVDaaUM9vAoZaTU2WyrBJlxTk9EojsPgLTmwhsnk
tlrH4ugxSgxVqKavNcrg3g3Q6WtF3a2NGZY+8h8SS6A0w3kO7J1MzelxCj1LRaWL
HJCWsE5Gs8OvWIHjNRpVwlQosZIQO1DeMXbR70phhTHwtZp4voYArXATskFtLBNx
FHqd9ZEI3eD6kp0RTr0GS1YWoi3zcVC0rRUIOEn2igthvzmJEunNc7AsPgWSuF4E
vT7D0lGHAfz1Nww1Y5CSykxNeywmC9d73zn1qCPwOPiEaRJ5NmcvzZaLbZUPS3Kz
yO2EQrW3M2AhgCGsiyqK
=nwYo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--TxukmIqg3MmZ0Kmh--