From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Configurable location for extension .control files |
Date: | 2013-06-05 19:07:56 |
Message-ID: | 51AF8C8C.9090506@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom,
> Yeah, if the config option were to be superuser-only, the security issue
> would be ameliorated --- not removed entirely, IMO, but at least
> weakened. However, this seems to me to be missing the point, which is
> that the extensions feature is designed to let the DBA have control over
> which extensions are potentially installable. If we allow extension
> control files to be loaded from any random directory then we lose that.
> Part of the argument for not requiring superuser permissions to execute
> CREATE EXTENSION was based on that restriction, so we'd need to go back
> and rethink the permissions needed for CREATE EXTENSION.
I do see the utility in having the extension folder relocatable by
packagers; I could really use this for vagrant builds of PostgreSQL,
which I use for testing. Right now I do a lot of file copying of .so
files. In my case, though, I only need to change the whole extension
folder location, I don't need to have multiple locations, a dirpath, or
anything sophisticated. That is, a super-user, cold-start only option
of "extension_path='/vagrant/extensions/'" would work for my case, and I
suspect most packaging cases as well.
This seems like it would work for Oliver's case. And I don't see how
making the folder relocatable as an on-start option hurts our security
at all; we're simply doing something which the same user could do with
symlinks, only much more neatly.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-06-05 19:18:10 | Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-06-05 18:35:32 | Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments |