From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Ragnar <gnari(at)hive(dot)is> |
Cc: | Kevin Hunter <hunteke(at)earlham(dot)edu>, Postgres General List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Must be table owner to truncate? |
Date: | 2008-07-30 14:46:02 |
Message-ID: | 20080730144602.GQ16005@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
* Ragnar (gnari(at)hive(dot)is) wrote:
>
> On mið, 2008-07-30 at 07:36 -0400, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> > At 3:45p -0400 on Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Said Ramirez wrote:
> > > According to the documentation,
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/sql-truncate.html ,
> > > only the owner can truncate a table. Which means the non-owner must
> > > either log in/ switch roles as the owner, or they can just run a DELETE.
> >
> > Well that's interesting. From a security standpoint, what's the
> > difference between an unqualified DELETE and a TRUNCATE?
>
> lack of triggers and RULEs spring to mind.
It also takes a bigger lock on the table than DELETE, which may or may
not be considered a security issue. triggers really are the big issue
wrt security and why it deserves to be a seperatelly grantable
permission from delete.
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-07-30 14:51:44 | Re: Connecting to an existing transaction state. |
Previous Message | Francisco Reyes | 2008-07-30 14:23:12 | Re: Connecting to an existing transaction state. |