Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and secondary password file

2002-03-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > Is it worth keeping this password capability in 7.3? It requires > > 'password' in pg_hba.conf, which is not secure, and I am not sure how > > many OS's still use crypt in /etc/passwd anyway. Removing the feature > > would clear up pg_hba.co

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and secondary password file

2002-03-15 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes: > Is it worth keeping this password capability in 7.3? It requires > 'password' in pg_hba.conf, which is not secure, and I am not sure how > many OS's still use crypt in /etc/passwd anyway. Removing the feature > would clear up pg_hba.conf options a little. Personally, I

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and secondary password file

2002-03-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Right now, we support a secondary password file reference in > > pg_hba.conf. > > Is it worth keeping this password capability in 7.3? > > I'd not cry if it went away. We could get rid of pg_passwd, which > is an ugly mess... Yes,

Re: [HACKERS] pg_hba.conf and secondary password file

2002-03-15 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Right now, we support a secondary password file reference in > pg_hba.conf. > Is it worth keeping this password capability in 7.3? I'd not cry if it went away. We could get rid of pg_passwd, which is an ugly mess... regards, to