Re: So we're in agreement....

on 5/8/00 11:38 AM, Philip Warner at pjw@rhyme.com.au wrote:

> I may well have missed something here, but it seems to me that the above
> scheme is also not particularly secure since someone who has managed to get
> access to the pg_shadow file will be able to fake a login by using a custom
> client. ie:

Yes, absolutely, but someone who gets the pg_shadow file can also alter the
database however he/she wants. The protocol defined prevents any knowledge
gained from sniffing, and prevents discovery of plaintext passwords from
looking at pg_shadow.

However, it does not prevent logins, as you mention, because once you have
the pg_shadow file, you've got everything anyways.

-Ben