On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 12:03:49PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:46:46AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > From a security point of view, 1) is important for libpq, but I am not > > much enthusiast about 2) as a whole. The backend has proper support for > > channel binding, hence other drivers speaking the protocol could have > > their own restriction mechanisms. > > So, I have been playing with libpq to address point 1), and added a new > connection parameter called channel_binding_mode which can be set to > 'prefer', which is what libpq uses now, and 'require'. The patch has > two important parts:
Good work, but I think the existance of both scram_channel_binding and channel_binding_mode in libpq is confusing. I am thinking we should have one channel binding parameter that can take values "prefer", "tls-unique", "tls-server-end-point", and "require". I don't see the point to having "none" and "allow" that sslmode supports. "tls-unique" and "tls-server-end-point" would _require_ those channel binding modes; the setting would never be ignored, e.g. if no SSL. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
