From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: elog() patch |
Date: | 2002-03-01 05:46:29 |
Message-ID: | 26115.1014961589@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Peter is also concerned if allowing clients to see elog() messages is a
> security problem. Clients can't see postmaster messages because there
> is no client at the time, but backend messages will be visible. I can't
> think of any server log messages that shouldn't be seen by the client.
The only thing I can think of is the detailed authorization-failure
messages that the postmaster has traditionally logged but not sent to
the client. We need to be sure that the client cannot change that
behavior by setting PGOPTIONS. I *think* this is OK, since client
options aren't processed till after the auth cycle finishes --- but
check it. If you are using IsUnderPostmaster to control things then
you might have a problem, because that gets set too soon.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Meskes | 2002-03-01 08:03:12 | Re: Oracle vs PostgreSQL in real life |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2002-03-01 05:24:39 | Re: Database Caching |