Skip to content

[Feature]: Configurable PgBouncer TLS cipher parameters #9570

Description

@alex1989hu

Is there an existing issue already for this feature request/idea?

  • I have searched for an existing issue, and could not find anything. I believe this is a new feature request to be evaluated.

What problem is this feature going to solve? Why should it be added?

This feature addresses the lack of fine-grained control over TLS cipher selection in PgBouncer. Currently, users cannot explicitly configure which TLS ciphers are permitted for client and server connections, which makes it difficult to enforce organizational security policies, comply with regulatory requirements, or quickly respond to newly discovered cryptographic weaknesses.

Adding configurable TLS cipher parameters (client_tls_ciphers, client_tls13_ciphers, and server_tls13_ciphers) would give operators direct control over cipher negotiation, improving security posture and operational flexibility. This is particularly important in environments with strict compliance or hardened security baselines.

TLS v1.3 specific configuration options were introduced in PgBouncer v1.25.0 (ref: https://www.pgbouncer.org/changelog.html#pgbouncer-125x), so extending configuration to explicitly control cipher suites is a natural and consistent evolution of the existing TLS feature set.

Describe the solution you'd like

Extend the AllowedPgbouncerGenericConfigurationParameters string set to include client_tls_ciphers, client_tls13_ciphers, and server_tls13_ciphers, allowing these TLS cipher configuration options to be passed through and managed explicitly in PgBouncer.

Describe alternatives you've considered

No viable alternatives were considered, because the webhook currently rejects any attempt to set these options, making it impossible to configure TLS cipher parameters through other means.

Additional context

No response

Backport?

N/A

Are you willing to actively contribute to this feature?

Yes

Code of Conduct

  • I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

Activity

  1. alex1989hu commented on Dec 25, 2025

    @alex1989hu
    ContributorAuthor

    I'd like to work on this

  2. github-actions commented on Feb 24, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    This issue is stale because it has been open for 60 days with no activity.

  3. moved this to Waiting for First Review in CloudNativePG operator developmenton Mar 5, 2026
  4. added this to the 1.29.0 milestone on Mar 5, 2026
  5. moved this from Waiting for First Review to Done in CloudNativePG operator developmenton Mar 9, 2026
  6. added a commit that references this issue on Mar 9, 2026
    4df0daf
  7. added a commit that references this issue on Mar 9, 2026
    f97b08e
  8. added 2 commits that reference this issue on Mar 9, 2026
    19b3f6a
    bb33c5f
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions