On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote: >> On 12/15/16 8:40 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> > I don't follow why we can't change the syntax for CREATE USER to allow >> > specifying the verifier type independently. >> >> That's what the last patch set I looked at actually does. > > Well, same here, but it was quite a while ago and things have progressed > since then wrt SCRAM, as I understand it...
>From the discussions of last year on -hackers, it was decided to *not* have an additional column per complains from a couple of hackers (Robert you were in this set at this point), and the same thing was concluded during the informal lunch meeting at PGcon. The point is, the existing SCRAM patch set can survive without touching at *all* the format of pg_authid. We could block SCRAM authentication when "password" is used in pg_hba.conf and as well as when "scram" is used with a plain password stored in pg_authid. Or look at the format of the string in the catalog if "password" is defined and decide the authentication protocol to follow based on that. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
