Re: [PATCHES] Roles - SET ROLE Updated

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Roles - SET ROLE Updated
Date: 2005-07-22 12:42:54
Message-ID: 200507221442.55198.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Am Donnerstag, 21. Juli 2005 22:55 schrieb Tom Lane:
> What this says is that when a role A is a member of another role B, A
> automatically has all of B's privileges. But when a user U is a member
> of role R, U does *not* have R's privileges automatically. What he has
> is the right to do SET ROLE R, after which he has R's privileges in
> addition to his own (see the rest of 4.31.4).
>
> This is ... um ... a pretty bizarre way of looking at security.
> U can in fact do whatever his roles allow him to do, he just needs to
> say "Mother may I?" first.

In some circles, this is considered the standard behavior of role security
models. (There is a NIST standard somewhere.) It allows (with additional
work) dynamic separation of concerns, namely that you could be a member of
roles A and B but cannot use both at the same time. This is admittedly a
fairly advanced feature, but should nevertheless be kept in mind.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Trout 2005-07-22 12:49:18 Re: Timezone bugs
Previous Message Michael Glaesemann 2005-07-22 09:57:54 interval->day patch and docs

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Trout 2005-07-22 12:49:18 Re: Timezone bugs
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2005-07-22 07:51:26 Re: Writing Commit Status hint bits (was Re: [HACKERS] Constant