Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1aV8Eq-0005lU-K7 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 01:46:08 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aV8Eq-0005No-3V for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 01:46:08 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aV8Eo-0005MI-64 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 01:46:06 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aV8Eh-00063C-Jc for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 01:46:05 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u1F1jN3q005747; Sun, 14 Feb 2016 20:45:23 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Stephen Frost cc: Michael Paquier , David Steele , Heikki Linnakangas , Bruce Momjian , Greg Stark , Robert Haas , Josh Berkus , Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: WIP: SCRAM authentication In-reply-to: <20160215012326.GK3331@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <20150904194819.GE26916@momjian.us> <20150904205133.GB3685@tamriel.snowman.net> <20150905003147.GD21484@momjian.us> <56BE1ECD.3020905@pgmasters.net> <20160215001725.GH3331@tamriel.snowman.net> <20160215005640.GI3331@tamriel.snowman.net> <20160215012326.GK3331@tamriel.snowman.net> Comments: In-reply-to Stephen Frost message dated "Sun, 14 Feb 2016 20:23:26 -0500" Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 20:45:23 -0500 Message-ID: <5746.1455500723@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Stephen Frost writes: > Why do we need pg_shadow or pg_user or related views at all..? A lot of code looks at those just to get usernames. I am not in favor of breaking such stuff without need. How about we just say that the password in these old views always reads out as '********' even when there is a password, and we invent new views that carry real auth information? (Hopefully in an extensible way.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers