Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kpwJx-0008Tn-FK for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:40:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kpwJu-0006PI-EC for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:40:02 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kpwJu-0006P0-7q for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:40:02 +0000 Received: from tamriel.snowman.net ([70.109.60.50]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kpwJn-0007Ea-T5 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 16:40:01 +0000 Received: by tamriel.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 32A7C5F7A2; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 11:39:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 11:39:55 -0500 From: Stephen Frost To: Michael Paquier Cc: Bruce Momjian , PostgreSQL-development , Masahiko Sawada Subject: Re: Proposed patch for key managment Message-ID: <20201217163954.GY16415@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <20201202213814.GG20285@momjian.us> <20201214230615.GA14596@momjian.us> <20201215031902.GB14596@momjian.us> <20201215210212.GG14596@momjian.us> <20201216220412.GB4527@momjian.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="grPVVRSFoixyb5v7" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --grPVVRSFoixyb5v7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings, * Michael Paquier (michael@paquier.xyz) wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 05:04:12PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> fallback implementation. Finally, pgcrypto is not touched, but we > >=20 > > I have a fallback implemention --- it fails? ;-) Did you want me to > > include an AES implementation? >=20 > No idea about this one yet. There are no direct users of AES except > pgcrypto in core. One thing that would be good IMO is to properly > split the patch of this thread into individual parts that could be > reviewed separately using for example "git format-patch" to generate > patch series. What's presented is a mixed bag, so that's harder to > look at it and consider how this stuff should work, and if there are > pieces that should be designed better or not. I don't think there's any need for us to implement a fallback implementation of AES. I'm not entirely sure we need it for hashes but since we've already got it... Thanks, Stephen --grPVVRSFoixyb5v7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJf24naAAoJEO1sijiDR2RVW1cP/1MjRGZFzpBuLSmTWu+iMVYb iVciSqfFoFviWSpznfqr+/iKkFDawOrpe9cKMhb6gCnbWZMubMAbBp4LhiC3g8fN HFfpoeE+Pr2F0p9Zdz0yGG9bGURjzJyGs3WSLnWtpB49VIa3QwGORTO6so1mwUCI VwGFT0EX8XENLTAqVZ65ZxJvmvfluCmSLWIsBhisTUtsJsLSInFJZijutPVjS60x tEcflcMufZCmqVzPjKcT0DC9ECHybDaEC/qT6y4Z6Zuv9hRRJmT3Hr+9nwwnr4E/ aVJEj3D7nsfqXyhu3TOxFCXYaq72LwZqUmaq9YRlzXZXt4A65upkDT9zOAsnqFgR uc5za8BkWW/AneSn86bGiuRJdgdMxEqaWWizsoVJzutOXDrtqSXvIUsdKkEMurHH j68wUdPRbA9bhYv9XsA1BdIV/bnTrvGk5bHyA8psKB/K0ULKjgbXaw33P7JuWhsT r5rjfSzT2k7o3CxImvY5QlQHdhjU7v7vHVuHBwIzaepqCpPX7sXK17EDb0WaD1KS zA88X386TRurDuzRoU2zU1ZQaXyCGqwImiZONR3QLXqplzd2yGtzVd11fOhOc1/h Dcxbf0Ft078cv4cA1D2al4va8lLjaMBmpVfmsBYKwgFOCLyIq8/Y9g2WvCEAYqaF 8HxWutiuq0Odk94HwZj2 =Oup0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --grPVVRSFoixyb5v7--