Re: WIP patch (v2) for updatable security barrier views

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: WIP patch (v2) for updatable security barrier views
Date: 2013-12-13 13:52:43
Message-ID: 52AB112B.6020403@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi all

Here's an updated version of the updatable security barrier views patch
that's proposed as the next stage of progressing row-security toward
useful and maintainable inclusion in core.

If updatable security barrier views are available then the row-security
code won't have to play around with remapping vars and attrs during
query planning when it injects its subquery late. We'll simply stop the
planner flattening an updatable security barrier view, and for
row-security we'll dynamically inject one during rewriting when we see a
relation that has a row-security attribute.

This patch just implements updatable security barrier views. It is a
work in progress with at least two known crash bugs and limited testing.
I'd greatly appreciate comments (and advice) from those who are
interested in the problem domain as we proceed further into work on 9.4.

The patch is attached; it's on top of
46328916eefc5f9eaf249518e96f68afcd35923b, current head. It doens't yet
touch the documentation, but the only change needed should be to remove
the restriction on security_barrier views from the definition of what a
"simply updatable" view is.

There are couple of known issues: a crash with INSERT ... RETURNING;
DEFAULT handling through views isn't implemented yet; and a crash I just
found on UPDATE of a view that re-orders the original table columns. As
a result it doesn't survive "make check" yet.

I'm still working on fixing these issues and on finding more.
Suggestions/comments would be appreciated. I'll post specifics of the
INSERT ... RETURNING one soon, as I'm increasingly stuck on it.

Simple demo:

-- The 'id' is 'integer' not 'serial' because of the limitation with
-- DEFAULT mentioned below.

CREATE TABLE t (id integer primary key, secret text);

INSERT INTO t(id, secret)
SELECT x, 'secret'||x FROM generate_series(1,100) x;

CREATE VIEW t_even AS
SELECT id, secret FROM t WHERE id % 2 = 0;

CREATE VIEW t_even_sb WITH (security_barrier) AS
SELECT id, secret FROM t WHERE id % 2 = 0;

CREATE VIEW t_even_check WITH (check_option = 'cascaded') AS
SELECT id, secret FROM t WHERE id % 2 = 0;

CREATE VIEW t_even_check_sb WITH (check_option = 'cascaded',
security_barrier) AS
SELECT id, secret FROM t WHERE id % 2 = 0;

You'll find that the same f_leak tests used in the original read
security barrier views work here, too.

-- Subsets of cols work:

CREATE VIEW just_id AS SELECT id FROM t;
INSERT INTO just_id(id) VALUES (101);

CREATE VIEW just_id_sb WITH (security_barrier) AS
SELECT id FROM t;
INSERT INTO just_id_sb(id) VALUES (101);

-- Reversed column-lists work:

CREATE VIEW reversed AS SELECT secret, id FROM t;
INSERT INTO reversed(id, secret) VALUES (102, 'fred');

CREATE VIEW reversed_sb WITH (security_barrier) AS
SELECT secret, id FROM t;
INSERT INTO reversed_sb(id, secret) VALUES (102, 'fred');

-- WITH CHECK OPTION is working

postgres=# INSERT INTO t_even_check(id, secret) values (296, 'blah');
INSERT 0 1
postgres=# INSERT INTO t_even_check(id, secret) values (297, 'blah');
ERROR: new row violates WITH CHECK OPTION for view "t_even_check"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (297, blah).

postgres=# INSERT INTO t_even_check_sb(id, secret) values (298, 'blah');
INSERT 0 1
postgres=# INSERT INTO t_even_check_sb(id, secret) values (299, 'blah');
ERROR: new row violates WITH CHECK OPTION for view "t_even_check_sb"
DETAIL: Failing row contains (299, blah).

-- 3-col views are OK with various permutations

CREATE TABLE t3 ( id integer primary key, aa text, bb text );

CREATE VIEW t3_bai AS SELECT bb, aa, id FROM t3;
INSERT INTO t3_bai VALUES ('bb','aa',3);
UPDATE t3_bai SET bb = 'whatever' WHERE id = 3 RETURNING *;
DELETE FROM t3_bai RETURNING *;

CREATE VIEW t3_bai_sb WITH (security_barrier)
AS SELECT bb, aa, id FROM t3;
INSERT INTO t3_bai_sb VALUES ('bb','aa',3);

-- This crashes, with or without RETURNING. Bug in re-ord
-- UPDATE t3_bai_sb SET bb = 'whatever' WHERE id = 3 RETURNING *;

-- This is OK:
DELETE FROM t3_bai_sb RETURNING *;

--

Known issues:

DEFAULT injection doesn't occur correctly through the view. Needs some
changes in the rewriter where expand_target_list is called. Haven't
investigated in detail yet. Causes inserts through views to fail if
there's a default not null constraint, among other issues.

Any INSERT with a RETURNING clause through a view causes a crash (simple
VALUES clauses) or fails with "no relation entry for relid 1" (INSERT
... SELECT). UPDATE and DELETE is fine. Seems to be doing subquery
pull-up, producing a simple result sub-plan that incorrectly has a Var
reference but doesn't perform any scan. Issue traced to plan_subquery,
but no deeper yet.

Privilege enforcement has not yet been through a thorough test matrix.

UPDATE of a subset of columns fails. E.g.:

CREATE VIEW just_secret AS SELECT secret FROM t;
UPDATE just_secret SET secret = 'fred';

Known failing queries. Note that it doesn't matter what you choose from
RETURNING, any reference to a result relation will fail; constant
expressions succeed.

INSERT INTO t_even(id, secret) VALUES (218, 'fred')
RETURNING *;
-- **crash**

INSERT INTO t_even_sb(id, secret) VALUES (218, 'fred')
RETURNING *;
-- **crash**

INSERT INTO t_even_sb
SELECT x, 'secret'||x from generate_series(220,225) x
RETURNING *;
-- ERROR: no relation entry for relid 1

INSERT INTO t_even
SELECT x, 'secret'||x from generate_series(226,230) x
RETURNING *;
-- ERROR: no relation entry for relid 1

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-Updatable-views-WIP-2.patch text/x-patch 25.5 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabrízio de Royes Mello 2013-12-13 13:52:52 Re: Time-Delayed Standbys
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2013-12-13 13:44:30 Re: Time-Delayed Standbys