From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: WIP: SCRAM authentication
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 20:58:17 -0500
Message-ID: <6174.1455501497@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160215015110.GL3331@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: <20150905003147.GD21484@momjian.us>
<CAB7nPqQutw9kRSmu9Ww5CY2Lpmn_=SWfiqgXDtDoH_jdrS7EgQ@mail.gmail.com>
<56BE1ECD.3020905@pgmasters.net>
<CAB7nPqTDD_tnU2Pb3LuFcEB0M8iZxAUzemcegqgztxWk26jL4w@mail.gmail.com>
<20160215001725.GH3331@tamriel.snowman.net>
<CAB7nPqQ-p0kiVsLZaDSDW2+pe3voO2R9qu6wgfYWZBJZRDC4Rg@mail.gmail.com>
<20160215005640.GI3331@tamriel.snowman.net>
<CAB7nPqQqg3PiU9ZREmTzh3_QSJOah7aUWKzhaJLAxQY_hF6JAQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20160215012326.GK3331@tamriel.snowman.net>
<5746.1455500723@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20160215015110.GL3331@tamriel.snowman.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> 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.)
> I'd be alright with that approach, I'd just rather that any clients
> which actually want to read the password field be updated to look at the
> extensible and sensible base catalogs, and not some hacked up array that
> we shoved into that field.
Yeah, I'm good with that. I just don't think the breakage needs to extend
to clients that aren't trying to read auth-related information.
BTW, if we haven't learned this lesson by now: I'm pretty sure that every
single one of these views is an attempt to emulate what *used* to be the
real base catalog, in some previous release. Maybe we should stop
expecting clients to read the real catalog, ever, in favor of a sanitized
view? Although I don't know exactly what that would lead to in terms of
what we'd expose that's different from what the base catalog is. But it's
worth thinking about whether there is a way to avoid having this same
discussion again in five or ten years.
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
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sfrost@snowman.net, michael.paquier@gmail.com, david@pgmasters.net, hlinnaka@iki.fi, bruce@momjian.us, stark@mit.edu, robertmhaas@gmail.com, josh@agliodbs.com, peter_e@gmx.net
Subject: Re: WIP: SCRAM authentication
In-Reply-To: <6174.1455501497@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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