From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
Date: | 2001-06-15 14:34:19 |
Message-ID: | 24433.992615659@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I think the script idea may be best but it will have to be saved
> somewhere so once you run it all future password changes are encrypted
> in pg_shadow.
More to the point, how does the postmaster know that it's now dealing
with encrypted passwords and must use the double-salt auth method?
Seems to me that this is not a simple matter of changing the data in one
column of pg_shadow.
The thing I like about a configure option is that when it's in place you
know it's in place. No question of whether some rows of pg_shadow
managed to escape being updated, or any silliness like that. Your point
about "they think they are safe but they are not" seems relevant here.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joe Conway | 2001-06-15 14:57:37 | Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-06-15 14:22:53 | Re: NOTICE messages |