Re: ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE is broken

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE is broken
Date: 2013-06-07 23:32:40
Message-ID: 20130607233240.GD408429@tornado.leadboat.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:49:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> > On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 12:26:59PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Essentially the argument for allowing this without a permissions check
> >> is "I'm not really doing anything to the schema, just preconfiguring the
> >> rights that will be attached to a new object if I later (successfully)
> >> create one in this schema".
>
> > Seems fine. I might have instead changed it to a test of the caller's
> > permissions.
>
> I thought a bit about that, but it seems rather unrelated to the
> eventual use of the privileges.

Fair enough.

> > Roles and their memberships will be dumped in the globals portion of
> > pg_dumpall, whereas ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES will be dumped for individual
> > databases. How might a restore-order hazard arise?
>
> The issue is that the A.D.P. must come out after a grant of CREATE
> privileges on the schema.

Oh, true. The facts I called out there were inapplicable.

--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2013-06-07 23:46:09 Re: About large objects asynchronous and non-blocking support
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2013-06-07 23:10:24 Re: Bad error message on valuntil