From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Fixing insecure security definer functions |
Date: | 2007-05-29 02:55:33 |
Message-ID: | 20070529025533.GQ7531@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > It would be useful to have a function which could be passed a relative
> > (to the caller's search path) object name and would return the fully
> > qualified name of that object. In this way, functions could be written
> > which take relative arguments from the user but *only* those explicitly
> > checked for.
>
> Your example doesn't seem to be doing anything interesting ... am I
> misunderstanding, or did you omit the actual checking? Also, if the
> search path is controlled by the function, what good is this ---
> wouldn't it always result in a trusted schema?
The idea was that 'pg_getfullpath()' would return the full path to an
object relative to the caller's path while in a function which has an
explicit search_path defined. Probably more sensible is an example of
what I'm thinking the function would do:
postgres=# create schema myschema;
CREATE SCHEMA
postgres=# set search_path=myschema;
SET
postgres=# create table abc (a int);
CREATE TABLE
postgres=# select pg_getfullpath('abc');
fullpath
----------
myschema.abc
The 'special' bit here is that pg_getfullpath() would work relative to
the caller's search_path even inside of a function which has its 'PATH'
set. That's really the only thing about it that makes it very
interesting.
Of course, thinking a bit farther along, this would only be useful when
building up an SQL statement as a string to then execute, but you have
to do that if you're getting a table passed in as an argument anyway
(and is exactly what I'm doing).
Hope that helps.
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-05-29 03:19:26 | Re: Fixing insecure security definer functions |
Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2007-05-29 02:49:00 | Re: What is the maximum encoding-conversion growth rate, anyway? |