public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Stephen Frost <[email protected]>
To: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
Cc: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>
Cc: samay sharma <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 09:58:41 -0500
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
<[email protected]>
Greetings,
* Bruce Momjian ([email protected]) wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 08:31:19AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > The last time I played with this area is the recent error handling
> > > improvement with cryptohashes but MD5 has actually helped here in
> > > detecting the problem as a patched OpenSSL would complain if trying to
> > > use MD5 as hash function when FIPS is enabled.
> >
> > Having to continue to deal with md5 as an algorithm when it's known to
> > be notably less secure and so much so that organizations essentially ban
> > its use for exactly what we're using it for, in fact, another reason to
>
> Really? I thought it was publicly-visible MD5 hashes that were the
> biggest problem. Our 32-bit salt during the connection is a problem, of
> course.
Neither are good. Not sure that we really need to spend a lot of effort
trying to figure out which issue is the biggest problem.
> > remove it, not a reason to keep it. Better code coverage testing of
> > error paths is the answer to making sure that our error handling behaves
> > properly.
>
> What is the logic to removing md5 but keeping 'password'?
I don't think we should keep 'password'.
Thanks,
Stephen
Attachments:
[application/pgp-signature] signature.asc (819B, ../[email protected]/2-signature.asc)
download
view thread (23+ messages) latest in thread
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: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox