| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Adam Brightwell <adam(dot)brightwell(at)crunchydatasolutions(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yeb Havinga <yeb(dot)havinga(at)portavita(dot)nl> |
| Subject: | Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner? |
| Date: | 2014-06-10 23:26:15 |
| Message-ID: | 53979417.4030808@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/11/2014 07:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Is the point of that that the table owner might have put trojan-horse
> functions into the RLS qual? If so, why are we only concerned about
> defending the superuser and not other users? Seems like the right fix
> would be to insist that functions in the RLS qual run as the table owner.
> Granted, that might be painful to do. But it still seems like "we only
> need to do this for superusers" is designing with blinkers on.
I agree, and now that the urgency of trying to deliver this for 9.4 is
over it's worth seeing if we can just run as table owner.
Failing that, we could take the approach a certain other RDBMS does and
make the ability to define row security quals a GRANTable right
initially held only by the superuser.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-10 23:32:07 | Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-06-10 23:24:11 | Re: API change advice: Passing plan invalidation info from the rewriter into the planner? |