Re: Decision by Monday: PQescapeString() vs. encoding violation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com
Subject: Re: Decision by Monday: PQescapeString() vs. encoding violation
Date: 2025-02-15 19:12:06
Message-ID: 164408.1739646726@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> On 2025-02-15 13:08:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The other thing that was discussed in the security thread was
>> modifying PQescapeStringInternal and PQescapeInternal to produce
>> no more than one complaint about invalid multibyte characters,
>> on the grounds that input that's just plain in some other encoding
>> would otherwise produce a ton of repetitive messages. That seems
>> trivial enough to mechanize with a bool already_complained flag,
>> so I think we should incorporate that refinement while we're here.

> +1

On closer inspection, PQescapeInternal already issues only one
error message, since it does "return NULL" after detecting the
first error. So this makes PQescapeStringInternal behave more
like that.

regards, tom lane

Attachment Content-Type Size
v5-0001-Make-escaping-functions-retain-trailing-bytes-of-.patch text/x-diff 10.3 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-02-15 20:09:48 Re: Decision by Monday: PQescapeString() vs. encoding violation
Previous Message Noah Misch 2025-02-15 18:38:52 Re: Decision by Monday: PQescapeString() vs. encoding violation