From: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "'Andre Labuschagne *EXTERN*'" <technical(at)eduadmin(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alan Hodgson <ahodgson(at)lists(dot)simkin(dot)ca>, "pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Permissions |
Date: | 2016-10-05 12:06:46 |
Message-ID: | A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B538BE4D7@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Andre Labuschagne wrote:
> Encryption is meaningless if the super user can control the encrypting. What is required is the
> following: the super user grants a user the rights to create a database and all objects within the
> database. The super user simply grants the user that right. The super user has zero access to what
> that user creates unless that user explicitly grants the super user those rights. That is called
> security. That is what I am trying to achieve with PG. I was hoping that it is possible to do such a
> thing. That is what Mimer, Sybase and Interbase [and perhaps others I am yet to encounter] do as a
> matter of course. It as necessary for the security of a database as wheels are to a car.
If you need exactly that feature, you are probably happier with a different database
system, because PostgreSQL doesn't have it and probably never will.
Most people would argue that this is no hard security, it only makes the attack
more complicated. As a database superuser I can access files on the file system
in any database I ever heard of, thus I can read the files containing the tables,
thus I can figure out what is in them.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andre Labuschagne | 2016-10-05 12:15:18 | Re: Permissions |
Previous Message | Andre Labuschagne | 2016-10-05 11:51:29 | Re: Permissions |