From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Chander Ganesan" <chander(at)otg-nc(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts |
Date: | 2009-08-25 20:41:00 |
Message-ID: | 2325.1251232860@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> You're thinking that pg_ctl would capture it's parent PID and pass it
> to the postmaster one way or the other? That seems like it covers the
> specific issue you were referencing up-thread. It has been bubbling
> around in my head that we have other processes which run under the
> same user ID for such things as vacuum and purge scripts, as well as
> rsync of backup files. These would still create some risk of a false
> match, right? Just a much smaller risk?
Only if they are running at times when your postmaster(s) aren't ...
realistically, unless you launch them from initscripts that start before
your postmasters launch, I don't think there's going to be a problem.
Still, just from a security point of view, it might be better if those
don't run as the postgres operating-system user. Not sure if that's
workable for rsync (since it has to be able to read the postgres files)
but stuff like vacuum scripts could surely be run from a different
userid.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-08-25 20:41:41 | Re: We should Axe /contrib/start-scripts |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-08-25 20:39:50 | Re: pg_hba.conf: samehost and samenet |