Re: Hardening PostgreSQL via (optional) ban on local file system access

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Pang <robertpang(at)google(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Hardening PostgreSQL via (optional) ban on local file system access
Date: 2022-06-29 06:51:10
Message-ID: 2c3408a04a94f482247a8e646f5778d7b92a4923.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2022-06-28 at 16:27 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Experience shows that 99% of the time one can run PostgreSQL just fine
> > without a superuser
>
> IME that's not at all true. It might not be needed interactively, but that's
> not all the same as not being needed at all.

I also disagree with that. Not having a superuser is one of the pain
points with using a hosted database: no untrusted procedural languages,
no untrusted extensions (unless someone hacked up PostgreSQL or provided
a workaround akin to a SECURITY DEFINER function), etc.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pantelis Theodosiou 2022-06-29 06:55:55 Re: PostgreSQL 15 beta 2 release announcement draft
Previous Message Alexander Pyhalov 2022-06-29 06:45:49 Re: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY on partitioned index