| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Yuli Khodorkovskiy <yuli(dot)khodorkovskiy(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)heterodb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Joshua Brindle <joshua(dot)brindle(at)crunchydata(dot)com>, Mike P <mike(dot)palmiotto(at)crunchydata(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: add a MAC check for TRUNCATE |
| Date: | 2019-09-25 21:57:46 |
| Message-ID: | 26736.1569448666@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2019-Sep-25, Yuli Khodorkovskiy wrote:
>> Since all existing DAC checks should have MAC, should these patches be
>> considered a bug fix and therefore back patched?
> I don't know the answer to that. My impression from earlier discussion
> is that this was seen as a non-backpatchable change, but I defer to Joe
> on that as committer. If it were up to me, the ultimate question would
> be: would such a change adversely affect existing running systems?
I don't see how the addition of a new permissions check could sanely
be back-patched unless it were to default to "allow", which seems like
an odd choice.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Euler Taveira | 2019-09-25 23:20:32 | Re: row filtering for logical replication |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-09-25 21:49:15 | Re: add a MAC check for TRUNCATE |