| From: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, bruce(at)momjian(dot)us |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches [try#2] |
| Date: | 2008-07-08 09:08:49 |
| Message-ID: | 48732EA1.2070208@ak.jp.nec.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
KaiGai Kohei wrote:
>> Might want to change the option name --enable-selinux to something
>> like --security-context.
>>
>> In general, we might want to not name things selinux_* but instead
>> sepostgresql_* or security_* or security_context_*. Or maybe PGACE?
>
> The pgace_* scheme is an attractive idea, although the server process
> has to provide a bit more hints (like the name of security system column
> and the kind of objects exported with security attribute) pg_dump to
> support various kind of security features with smallest implementation.
It might not be necessary to provide all the hints pg_dump to make queries.
The minimum required information is which security feature is running on
the server process, or nothing. And, pg_dump can add a security system
column within its queries to get security attribute, if required.
Now, I'm considering to add pgaceDumpSOMETHING() functions within pg_dump
for better modularity. What do you think?
Thanks,
--
OSS Platform Development Division, NEC
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-07-08 09:21:13 | Re: [patch] plproxy v2 |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2008-07-08 09:01:05 | Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP |