| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Obfuscated stored procedures (was Re: Oracle and Postgresql) |
| Date: | 2008-09-24 20:08:25 |
| Message-ID: | 10637.1222286905@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-www |
Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 08:05:18AM -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>> C is not magic obfuscation gear. ...
> To be fair, one of the points that others are trying to make is not
> "secure this function for real" but "secure this function enough to
> make it a little costly."
Agreed, but there seems no particular need to have such a feature in
core Postgres. An add-on PL could accomplish that task just as well;
perhaps more so, if you don't make the add-on available to all and
sundry.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jason Long | 2008-09-24 20:10:10 | Re: Slony vs Longiste |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-24 20:03:02 | Re: case expression |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Casey Allen Shobe | 2008-09-24 20:13:01 | Re: Oracle and Postgresql |
| Previous Message | Casey Allen Shobe | 2008-09-24 19:44:33 | Re: Oracle and Postgresql |