Re: Rejecting weak passwords - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Rejecting weak passwords
Date
Msg-id 200910200408.n9K48Wd23470@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rejecting weak passwords  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at> writes:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Password checks might include password complexity or non-reuse of
> >> passwords. This facility will require the client to send the password to
> >> the server in plain-text, so SSL and 'password' authentication is
> >> necessary to use this features.
> 
> > So in my opinion that should be:
> > This facility will require to send new and changed password to
> > the server in plain-text, so it will require SSL, and the use
> > of encrypted passwords in CREATE/ALTER ROLE will have to be
> > disabled.
> 
> Actually, not one word of *either* version should be in TODO.  All of
> that is speculation about policies that a particular add-on module
> might or might not choose to enforce.

Agreed, updated:
|Allow server-side enforcement of password policies|Password checks might include password complexity or non-reuse
ofpasswords. This facility will require the client to send passwordcreation/changes to the server in plain-text, not
MD5.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: per table random-page-cost?
Next
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: per table random-page-cost?