On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:07:12PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 04/10/2017 08:42 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >As there have been some conflicts because of the commit of SASLprep,
> >here is a rebased set of patches. A couple of things worth noting:
> >- SASLprep does an allocation of the prepared password string. It is
> >definitely better to do all the ground work in pg_saslprep but this
> >costs a free() call with a #ifdef FRONTEND at the end of
> >scram_build_verifier().
> >- Patch 0005 does that:
> >+ /*
> >+ * Hash password using SCRAM-SHA-256 when connecting to servers
> >+ * newer than Postgres 10, and hash with MD5 otherwise.
> >+ */
> >+ if (pset.sversion < 100000)
> >+ encrypted_password = PQencryptPassword(pw1, user, "md5");
> >+ else
> >+ encrypted_password = PQencryptPassword(pw1, user, "scram");
> >Actually I am thinking that guessing the hashing function according to
> >the value of password_encryption would make the most sense. Thoughts?
>
> Thanks! I've been busy on the other thread on future-proofing the protocol
> with negotiating the SASL mechanism, I'll come back to this once we get that
> settled. By the end of the week, I presume.
This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com