1b7378b3d6
There are some problems with the tls-unique channel binding type. It's not supported by all SSL libraries, and strictly speaking it's not defined for TLS 1.3 at all, even though at least in OpenSSL, the functions used for it still seem to work with TLS 1.3 connections. And since we had no mechanism to negotiate what channel binding type to use, there would be awkward interoperability issues if a server only supported some channel binding types. tls-server-end-point seems feasible to support with any SSL library, so let's just stick to that. This removes the scram_channel_binding libpq option altogether, since there is now only one supported channel binding type. This also removes all the channel binding tests from the SSL test suite. They were really just testing the scram_channel_binding option, which is now gone. Channel binding is used if both client and server support it, so it is used in the existing tests. It would be good to have some tests specifically for channel binding, to make sure it really is used, and the different combinations of a client and a server that support or doesn't support it. The current set of settings we have make it hard to write such tests, but I did test those things manually, by disabling HAVE_BE_TLS_GET_CERTIFICATE_HASH and/or HAVE_PGTLS_GET_PEER_CERTIFICATE_HASH. I also removed the SCRAM_CHANNEL_BINDING_TLS_END_POINT constant. This is a matter of taste, but IMO it's more readable to just use the "tls-server-end-point" string. Refactor the checks on whether the SSL library supports the functions needed for tls-server-end-point channel binding. Now the server won't advertise, and the client won't choose, the SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS variant, if compiled with an OpenSSL version too old to support it. In the passing, add some sanity checks to check that the chosen SASL mechanism, SCRAM-SHA-256 or SCRAM-SHA-256-PLUS, matches whether the SCRAM exchange used channel binding or not. For example, if the client selects the non-channel-binding variant SCRAM-SHA-256, but in the SCRAM message uses channel binding anyway. It's harmless from a security point of view, I believe, and I'm not sure if there are some other conditions that would cause the connection to fail, but it seems better to be strict about these things and check explicitly. Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ec787074-2305-c6f4-86aa-6902f98485a4%40iki.fi
PostgreSQL Database Management System ===================================== This directory contains the source code distribution of the PostgreSQL database management system. PostgreSQL is an advanced object-relational database management system that supports an extended subset of the SQL standard, including transactions, foreign keys, subqueries, triggers, user-defined types and functions. This distribution also contains C language bindings. PostgreSQL has many language interfaces, many of which are listed here: https://www.postgresql.org/download See the file INSTALL for instructions on how to build and install PostgreSQL. That file also lists supported operating systems and hardware platforms and contains information regarding any other software packages that are required to build or run the PostgreSQL system. Copyright and license information can be found in the file COPYRIGHT. A comprehensive documentation set is included in this distribution; it can be read as described in the installation instructions. The latest version of this software may be obtained at https://www.postgresql.org/download/. For more information look at our web site located at https://www.postgresql.org/.