| From: | Jim Mercer <jim(at)reptiles(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Lincoln Yeoh <lyeoh(at)pop(dot)jaring(dot)my> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
| Date: | 2001-06-17 15:28:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20010617112816.L12958@reptiles.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 11:05:52PM +0800, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> At 12:04 AM 6/16/01 -0400, Jim Mercer wrote:
> >On Sat, Jun 16, 2001 at 11:20:30AM +0800, Lincoln Yeoh wrote:
> >> If you need to use encryption then having _everything_ encrypted is a
> >> better idea - SSL etc. Those >1GHz CPUs are handy ;).
> >
> >[ yes, i noted the smiley ]
> >
> >it is rather unfortunate to see the OSS community buying into the tenents
> >that allowed microsoft to get world domination based on crap quality
> >software.
> >
> >"hardware is cheap" is a falsehood.
>
> My point is if you really need encryption, then your data should be
> encrypted too, otherwise it seems a waste of time or more a "feel good" thing.
i would agree with that.
i guess my rantwas moreso in reaction to what i was as creeping featurism,
with words aluding to "depreciating" legacy functionality.
maybe not your words, but that was what set me off on this thread.
--
[ Jim Mercer jim(at)reptiles(dot)org +1 416 410-5633 ]
[ Now with more and longer words for your reading enjoyment. ]
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Doug McNaught | 2001-06-17 15:46:05 | Re: Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
| Previous Message | Lincoln Yeoh | 2001-06-17 15:05:52 | Re: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |