From: | "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Spoofing as the postmaster |
Date: | 2007-12-29 15:59:20 |
Message-ID: | 20071229105920.e6c7cd8c.darcy@druid.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 10:38:13 -0500
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
> D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> > - 1: How does the client assure that the postmaster is legit
> > - 2: How does the postmaster assure that the client is legit
>
> And neither answers the original problem:
Which seems to have been lost in the noise.
> 3. How can the sysadmin prevent a malicious local user from hijacking
> the sockets if the postmaster isn't running?
A better way of stating it for sure.
> Prevention is much more valuable than ex post detection, IMNSHO.
>
> Probably the first answer is not to run postgres on a machine with
> untrusted users, but that's not always possible. Maybe we can't find a
> simple cross-platform answer, but that doesn't mean we should not look
> at platform-specific answers, at least for documentation.
Yes, that's what I said at the start of this discussion. If you don't
trust the users with actual access to the box, the rest of this is
pretty much academic.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2007-12-29 16:37:41 | Re: Spoofing as the postmaster |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-12-29 15:38:13 | Re: Spoofing as the postmaster |