On 2015-10-22 16:47:09 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hm, and that's why you chose this way of going. My main concern about > this patch is that it adds on top of the existing Postgres protocol a > layer to encrypt and decrypt the messages between server and client > based on GSSAPI. All messages transmitted between client and server > are changed to 'g' messages on the fly and switched back to their > original state at reception. This is symbolized by the four routines > you added in the patch in this purpose, two for frontend and two for > backend, each one for encryption and decryption. I may be wrong of > course, but it seems to me that this approach will not survive > committer-level screening because of the fact that context-level > things invade higher level protocol messages.
Agreed. At least one committer here indeed thinks this approach is not acceptable (and I've said so upthread). Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
