From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Security implications of config-file-location patch |
Date: | 2004-10-08 04:35:49 |
Message-ID: | 200410080435.i984ZnO19629@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > If they are using tablespaces is it OK that anyone can see their
> > location?
>
> Good point. Should we obscure pg_tablespace similarly to what we do for
> pg_shadow?
Well, if we feel file locations are better left only visible to
super-users, we should. However, when managing disk space, aren't
normal users also often interested in which disk drives will store their
data? I don't see a big value to obscuring pgdata myself.
I suppose one solution would be for administrators to name their
tablespaces after the disk drive names if they want their users will
know the drive names.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2004-10-08 05:01:22 | Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-08 04:28:16 | Re: Security implications of config-file-location patch |