Re: Rejecting weak passwords - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Rejecting weak passwords
Date
Msg-id 3043.1255551955@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Rejecting weak passwords  (Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
> I said up front this was a box-ticking exercise for these folks,
> however, rather than just tick the box and move on (meh - who cares if
> we can store 2009-02-31 - it stores all the valid dates which are the
> ones that matter :-p ) I prefer to discuss the issue and do the best
> job we can to make it a practical, usable and useful feature - which
> is kinda what we usually pride ourselves in doing!

Well, sure.  I just don't want to move backwards on other dimensions
in order to move forward on this one.  It's fair to argue that support
of pre-crypted passwords closes only some holes that can be closed in
other ways, but it's equally fair to argue that the limited capability
of a plugin that has to check pre-crypted passwords also represents a
corner case that can be solved in other ways.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rod Taylor
Date:
Subject: Could regexp_matches be immutable?
Next
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Rejecting weak passwords