Bugtraq mailing list archives

Re: [HACKERS] Postgres: pg_hba.conf, md5, pg_shadow, encrypted


From: Tino Wildenhain <tino () wildenhain de>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:47:33 +0200

Am Donnerstag, den 21.04.2005, 09:32 -0400 schrieb Rod Taylor:
On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 11:06 +0200, Tino Wildenhain wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 20.04.2005, 16:23 -0500 schrieb Jim C. Nasby:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 05:03:18PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
...
Simply put, MD5 is no longer strong enough for protecting secrets. It's
just too easy to brute-force. SHA1 is ok for now, but it's days are
numbered as well. I think it would be good to alter SHA1 (or something
stronger) as an alternative to MD5, and I see no reason not to use a
random salt instead of username.

I wonder where you want to store that random salt and how this would add
to the security.

One advantage of a random salt would be that the username can be changed
without having to reset the password at the same time.

Still this does not answer the question where that salt is to be
stored :)

(instead of username one could use somefacyhash(userid) to be 
independend from username - otoh, if you change usernames 
you usually face some other serious problems like object
ownership and friends)
-- 
Tino Wildenhain <tino () wildenhain de>


Current thread: