Re: Privileges and inheritance

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Privileges and inheritance
Date: 2009-10-04 18:56:01
Message-ID: 4AC8EFC1.1050209@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> So let's get rid of that. Selecting (or in general, operating) on a
> table with children only checks the privileges on that table, not the
> children. Is there any use case where the current behavior is useful at
> all?

In theory, someone out there may be using privs to restrict access to
child tables. In practice, this would be unmanageable enough that I
doubt anyone is doing it intentionally.

Except ... I can imagine a multi-tenant setup where certain ROLEs only
have permissions on some child relations, but not others. So we'd want
to still enable a permissions check on a child when the child is called
directly rather than through the parent.

And we'd want to hammer this to death looking for ways it can be a
security exploit. Like, could you make a table into the parent of an
existing table you didn't have permissions on?

> We could use a GUC variable to ease the transition, perhaps like
> sql_inheritance = no | yes_without_privileges | yes

no | without_privileges | yes

Mind you, this is a boolean now, isn't it?

--Josh Berkus

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dan Colish 2009-10-04 19:07:53 Re: Rules: A Modest Proposal
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2009-10-04 18:48:15 Re: Rules: A Modest Proposal