Re: [HACKERS] Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL

2010-02-03 Thread Michael Ledford
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Bad idea: once set, it'll never get unset, thus leaving installations with a weakened security posture even after they've installed fixed versions of openssl.                        regards, tom lane One might argue that

Re: [HACKERS] Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL

2010-02-03 Thread Michael Ledford
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Renegotiation after X amount of data is the recommended method AFAIK, because it limits the volume of data available to cryptanalysis. What makes you think that elapsed time is relevant at all?                        

[HACKERS] Daylight Saving Time question PostgreSQL 8.1.4

2007-03-13 Thread Michael Ledford
It appears that we didn't do enough research in regards to the recent DST switch. We poorly assumed that having our machine's timezone files up to date would be sufficient not knowing that our version of postgres relied on its own timezone files. The question is... can we symlink the

Re: [HACKERS] Daylight Saving Time question PostgreSQL 8.1.4

2007-03-13 Thread Michael Ledford
You can try the symlink game if you want, but it'll be on your own head whether it works or not. (For the record, I am hoping to do exactly that in future releases for Red Hat ... but in that context I know what the system's timezone code is. I'm less sure that I know what Apple is using.)