From: | Isaac Morland <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Georgios Kokolatos <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New default role- 'pg_read_all_data' |
Date: | 2020-08-28 12:51:06 |
Message-ID: | CAMsGm5cOPjtzuS-Tp6PqovbH-YzSOp4gEx9OFqjpchqnF+GHnA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 08:43, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> This would simply REVOKE that role from the user. Privileges
> independently GRANT'd directly to the user wouldn't be affected. Nor
> would other role membership.
>
> > What privileges would the user be left with? Would it be possible to end
> up in the same privilege only with a GRANT command?
>
What about:
REVOKE SELECT ON [table] FROM pg_read_all_data;
I guess what I’m really asking is whether pg_read_all_data is automatically
granted SELECT on all newly-created relations, or if the permission
checking system always returns TRUE when asked if pg_read_all_data can
select from a relation? I’m guessing it’s the latter so that it would be
ineffective to revoke select privilege as I think this is more useful, but
I’d like to be sure and the documentation should be explicit on this point.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2020-08-28 12:53:15 | Re: New default role- 'pg_read_all_data' |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2020-08-28 12:50:25 | Re: New default role- 'pg_read_all_data' |