On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 9:59 PM Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 12:26:27PM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
> > If we're going to open this up, can we add an option to say "this key is
> > allowed to log in to this account", SSH style?
> >
> > I like the idea of using keys rather than .
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 12:26:27PM -0400, Isaac Morland wrote:
> If we're going to open this up, can we add an option to say "this key is
> allowed to log in to this account", SSH style?
>
> I like the idea of using keys rather than .pgpass, but I like the ~/.ssh/
> authorized_keys model and don't
On Thu, 19 Sep 2019 at 12:26, Isaac Morland wrote:
> If we're going to open this up, can we add an option to say "this key is
> allowed to log in to this account", SSH style?
>
> I like the idea of using keys rather than .pgpass, but I like the
> ~/.ssh/authorized_keys model and don't like the "s
This certainly looks like a good addition to me that can be
implemented on both client and server side. It is always good to have
a common location where the list of all the certificates from various
CA's can be placed for validation.
--
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:http://www.enter
If we're going to open this up, can we add an option to say "this key is
allowed to log in to this account", SSH style?
I like the idea of using keys rather than .pgpass, but I like the
~/.ssh/authorized_keys model and don't like the "set up an entire
certificate infrastructure" approach.
On Thu,
Hi,
currently, libpq does SSL cerificate validation only against the defined
`PGSSLROOTCERT` file.
Is there any specific reason, why the system truststore ( at least under
unixoid systems) is not considered for the validation?
We would like to contribute a patch to allow certificate validation
