Re: password_encryption default

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: password_encryption default
Дата
Msg-id CA+Tgmoa53WpBX9mtYWWNPa-Nrg8bBEVfUEKYwgDwuJey3q3ZXg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: password_encryption default  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: password_encryption default  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 8:53 AM Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> More along these lines: We could also remove the ENCRYPTED and
> UNENCRYPTED keywords from CREATE and ALTER ROLE.  AFAICT, these have
> never been emitted by pg_dump or psql, so there are no concerns from
> that end.  Thoughts?

I have a question about this. My understanding of this area isn't
great. As I understand it, you can specify a password unencrypted and
let the system compute the validator from it, or you can compute the
validator yourself and then send that as the 'encrypted' password.
But, apparently, CREATE ROLE and ALTER ROLE don't really know which
thing you did. They just examine the string that you passed and decide
whether it looks like a validator. If so, they assume it is; if not,
they assume it's just a password.

But that seems really odd. What if you choose a password that just
happens to look like a validator? Perhaps that's not real likely, but
why do we not permit -- or even require -- the user to specify intent?
It seems out of character for us to, essentially, guess the meaning of
something ambiguous rather than requiring the user to be clear about
it.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Explain Analyze (Rollback off) Suggestion
Следующее
От: Stephen Frost
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: password_encryption default