On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Is there a TODO here?
There is still open ToDecide here: 1) Status quo - md5() in core, everything else in pgcrypto 2) Start moving other hashes as separate functions into core: eg. sha1() Problems: - sha1 will be obsolete soon, like md5 - many newer hashes: sha2 family, upcoming sha3 family - hex vs. binary api issue - hex-by-default in not good when you actually need cryptographic hash (eg. indexes) - does not solve the password storage problem. 3) Move digest() from pgcrypto into core, with same api. Problems: - does not solve the password storage problem. 4) Move both digest() and crypt() into core, with same api. Password problem - the cryptographic hashes are meant for universal usage, thus they need to be usable even on megabytes of data. This means they are easily bruteforceable, when the amount of data is microscopic (1..16 chars). Also they are unsalted, thus making cracking even easier. crypt() is better api for passwords. So when the main need to have hashes is password storage, then 2) is bad choice. My vote: 4), 1) -- marko -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
