| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, mlortiz <mlortiz(at)uci(dot)cu>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: Rejecting weak passwords |
| Date: | 2009-10-15 18:12:06 |
| Message-ID: | 11180.1255630326@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Yes, and it's an optional flag that could perfectly well be implemented
>> in the plugin that I think we do have consensus to add a hook for.
>> The argument is over why do we need to litter the core system with it.
> I already said that would suit me. The only other requirement I would
> have is a way for pgAdmin or other clients to figure out if that flag
> was set so they could construct queries appropriately (and yes, that
> could include refusing to send plain text passwords over non-SSL
> connections).
Well, if it's a GUC implemented by a plugin, it's still a GUC. All you
need is some side agreement between pgAdmin and potential GUC authors
about what the GUC will be called.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-15 18:16:31 | Re: Rejecting weak passwords |
| Previous Message | Mark Mielke | 2009-10-15 18:11:18 | Re: Rejecting weak passwords |