Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Joe Conway
Тема Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)
Дата
Msg-id c35cb9d6-bbfc-fb04-4517-9acd1f6f1d1a@joeconway.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Ответы Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 7/8/19 10:19 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> When people are asking for multiple keys (not just for key rotation),
> they are asking to have multiple keys that can be supplied by users only
> when they need to access the data.  Yes, the keys are always in the
> datbase, but the feature request is that they are only unlocked when the
> user needs to access the data.  Obviously, that will not work for
> autovacuum when the encryption is at the block level.

> If the key is always unlocked, there is questionable security value of
> having multiple keys, beyond key rotation.

That is not true. Having multiple keys also allows you to reduce the
amount of data encrypted with a single key, which is desirable because:

1. It makes cryptanalysis more difficult
2. Puts less data at risk if someone gets "lucky" in doing brute force


Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development


Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Broken defenses against dropping a partitioning column
Следующее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Add missing operator <->(box, point)