Re: ssl passphrase callback
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ssl passphrase callback |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20191114165250.iqjj5qkrakwwz7f2@development обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ssl passphrase callback (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 11:34:24AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >On 11/14/19 11:07 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 11:42:05AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 9:23 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> >>> I think it would be beneficial to explain why shared object is more >>> secure than an OS command. Perhaps it's common knowledge, but it's not >>> quite obvious to me. >>> >>> >>> Yeah, that probably wouldn't hurt. It's also securely passing from more than >>> one perspective -- both from the "cannot be eavesdropped" (like putting the >>> password on the commandline for example) and the requirement for escaping. >> I think a bigger issue is that if you want to give people the option of >> using a shell command or a shared object, and if you use two commands to >> control it, it isn't clear what happens if both are defined. By using >> some character prefix to control if a shared object is used, you can use >> a single variable and there is no confusion over having two variables >> and their conflicting behavior. >> > > >I'm not sure how that would work in the present instance. The shared >preloaded module installs a function and defines the params it wants. If >we somehow unify the params with ssl_passphrase_command that could look >icky, and the module would have to parse the settings string. That's not >a problem for the sample module which only needs one param, but it will >be for other more complex implementations. > >I'm quite open to suggestions, but I want things to be tolerably clean. > I agree it's better to have two separate GUCs - one for command, one for shared object, and documented order of precedence. I suppose we may log a warning when both are specified, or perhaps "reset" the value with lower order of precedence. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: