On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 03:29:28PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 15:23 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> For what it's worth, my vote would be for "connection authenticated: >> ... method=trust". > > I don’t have any particular objection to this language and agree that it’s > actually closer to how we talk about the trust auth method in our > documentation.
After sleeping on it, I think that I'd just agree with Robert's point to just use the same language as the message, while also agreeing with the patch to not set MyClientConnectionInfo.authn_id in the uaTrust case, only logging something under log_connections. + * No authentication was actually performed; this happens e.g. when the + * trust method is in use. This comment should be reworded a bit, say "No authentication identity was set; blah ..". > Maybe if we decided to rework the documentation … or perhaps just ripped > “trust” out entirely … but those are whole different things from what we > are trying to accomplish here. Not sure I see any point in doing that these days. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
