-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 274
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Streamline SSL experience #677
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5a3c1bf
Add ssl: :verify_full
josevalim 0437449
Update lib/postgrex/protocol.ex
josevalim 8d2ca0c
Update postgrex.ex
josevalim b850f96
Update lib/postgrex.ex
josevalim d697e78
Update postgrex.ex
josevalim dc832ba
Streamline :ssl
josevalim 8a9d6d1
Use Logger.warning
josevalim 112161f
Update lib/postgrex.ex
josevalim 80f748c
Update lib/postgrex/protocol.ex
josevalim 325a7e2
Always set server_name_indicator based on hostname
josevalim 1dffd59
More fixes
josevalim 08604bd
Fix
josevalim bd498b6
Remove deprecation warnings
josevalim File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👋
Sorry for posting on an old PR, but shouldn't the default here be
verify: :verify_none
(according to the warning)?It seems like -- by default --
:ssl
still tries to verify the peer.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think previous OTP defaulted to :verify_none and more recent to :verify_peer and so I believe the idea was for this legacy
ssl: true
to keep whatever that particular OTP defaulted to, howeverssl: list
would force secure defaults.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, but the warning kind of implies that no verification happens anyway when
ssl: true
:So, for the warning message to be true, setting
verify: :verify_none
seems safe (i.e. no surprises to the users).Right now, with the current
:ssl
and:ssl_opts
defaults it just doesn't work.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you know if this change broke any apps? Cause if the warning implies less security we should change the warning not intentionally make things less secure. Sorry I don't have an easy way to check how it all works right now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, I don't think it broke any apps. My suggestion was purely a (questionable) QoL improvement :)
Also it seems like right now the warning might be a false positive in this scenario:
Maybe some other wording could be used to highlight that:
ssl_opts
is deprecated and should be replaced withssl: list
ssl: true
doesn't work out-of-the-box andssl: [verify: :verify_none]
can be used to replicate?sslmode=require
ssl: [cacertfile: ...]
is the actual suggested approach