On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 11:35 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > To do anything interesting, the test would have to make the server > open a TCP port, which would be rightly seen as a security hazard. > So it'd have to be confined to a not-run-by-default test case.
Yeah. > Maybe we could add this to the existing src/test/ssl/ tests, > which already deal with that hazard? That seems okay in the short term. (But it certainly highlights our lack of a "PG_TEST_EXTRA=loopback-is-fine" mode...) --Jacob
