From: | Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pre-proposal: permissions made easier |
Date: | 2009-06-30 13:12:54 |
Message-ID: | 20090630131254.GC8417@yugib.highrise.ca |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> [090630 09:08]:
>
>
> Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
>>
>> *especially* if those grants remain "by reference", i.e. If I change the
>> GRANTS/REVOKES on sensitive_table, those are automatically "apply" to all
>> tables created with the "WITH GRANTS LIKE sensitive_table"...
>>
>>
>>
>
> Isn't that exactly what Tom is objecting to, namely that the permissions
> of an object would not be contained entirely in catalog entry for the
> object itself?
Well, it depends on how it's done... If one of the permissions on an
object you can assign is "look at $X", the you don't get the "hidden
permissions" problem. The object itself still contains everything you
need to "trace" the permissions of an object...
I have no idea if it's something that even half-aligns with the internal
permission model/code...
a.
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-06-30 13:26:23 | Re: use of pg_stat_database |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-06-30 13:11:39 | Re: 8.5 development schedule |