Re: elog() patch

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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