Hi Abhijit, I didn't realize you were involved in the IETF process on
SCRAM :-).
On 03/09/2015 09:21 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2015-03-08 12:48:44 -0700, j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Since SCRAM has been brought up a number of times here, I thought
I'd loop in the PostgreSQL contributor who is co-author of the SCRAM
standard to see if he has anything to say about implementing SCRAM as
a built-in auth method for Postgres.
I think it's a good idea.
Having done some googling, SCRAM seems like a good choice to me too.
Another one is SRP. The important difference between SRP and SCRAM is
that in SRP, an eavesdropper cannot capture information needed to
brute-force the password. The class of protocols that have that property
are called Password-authenticated key agreement protocols (PAKE) [1].
SRP seems to be the most common one of those, although there are others.
On the face of it, it seems like PAKE protocols are superior. There is
an IETF draft for SRP as a SASL authentication mechanism [2], and even
some implementations of that (e.g. Cyrus-SASL), but for some reason that
draft never became a standard and expired. Do you have any insight on
why the IETF working group didn't choose a PAKE protocol instead of or
in addition to SCRAM, when SCRAM was standardized?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Password-authenticated_key_agreement
[2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-burdis-cat-srp-sasl-08
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
