| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Misplaced superuser check in pg_log_backend_memory_contexts() |
| Date: | 2021-06-08 02:49:06 |
| Message-ID: | YL7aoiXXfIYtUOwj@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jun 06, 2021 at 11:13:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> However +1 for the patch, as it seems more consistent to always get a
>> permission failure if you're not a superuser.
>
> Yeah, it's just weird if such a check is not the first thing
> in the function. Even if you can convince yourself that the
> actions taken before that don't create any security issue today,
> it's not hard to imagine that innocent future code rearrangements
> could break that argument. What's the value of postponing the
> check anyway?
Thanks for the input, I have applied the patch.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2021-06-08 02:50:08 | Re: A modest proposal vis hierarchical queries: MINUS in the column list |
| Previous Message | Joel Jacobson | 2021-06-08 02:48:20 | Re: security_definer_search_path GUC |