Re: Failing to known state

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: oleg yusim <olegyusim(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Failing to known state
Date: 2016-01-05 23:33:16
Message-ID: 568C52BC.7030703@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 01/05/2016 03:21 PM, oleg yusim wrote:
> Thanks JD.
>
> From what I read about WAL (you have been referring to this:
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/wal-internals.html
> pg_xlog, right?) it allows us to know what happened, but does it
> warranty known secure state? I mean, I do not think it would help with this:
>
> "In general, security mechanisms should be designed so that a failure
> will follow the same execution path as disallowing the operation. For
> example, application security methods, such as isAuthorized(),
> isAuthenticated(), and validate(), should all return false if there is
> an exception during processing. If security controls can throw
> exceptions, they must be very clear about exactly what that condition
> means. "

You are correct, that isn't the pg_xlog but yes, PostgreSQL will throw
an exception in those types of cases.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Klaver 2016-01-05 23:34:28 Re: Failing to known state
Previous Message oleg yusim 2016-01-05 23:21:40 Re: Failing to known state