Re: OpenSSL key renegotiation with patched openssl
- From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
- To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: OpenSSL key renegotiation with patched openssl
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:21:10 +0100
- Message-id: <9837222c0911301321g724291efw821dc74d5640486a@mail.gmail.com> <text/plain>
2009/11/27 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> The discussion I saw suggested that you need such a patch at both ends.
>
>> and likely requires a restart of both postgresql and slony afterwards...
>
> Actually, after looking through the available info about this:
> https://svn.resiprocate.org/rep/ietf-drafts/ekr/draft-rescorla-tls-renegotiate.txt
> I think my comment above is wrong. It is useful to patch the
> *server*-side library to reject a renegotiation request. Applying that
> patch on the client side, however, is useless and simply breaks things.
I haven't looked into the details but - is there a point for us to
remove the requests for renegotiation completely? Will this help those
that *haven't* upgraded their openssl library? I realize it's not
necessarily our bug to fix, but if we can help.. :) If a patched
version of openssl ignores the renegotiation anyway, there's nothing
lost if we turn it off in postgresql, is there?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index