Re: has_privs_of_role vs. is_member_of_role, redux

Robert Haas:
> Well, maybe. Suppose that role A has been granted pg_read_all_settings
> WITH INHERIT TRUE, SET TRUE and role B has been granted
> pg_read_all_settings WITH INHERIT TRUE, SET FALSE. A can create a
> table owned by pg_read_all_settings. If A does that, then B can now
> create a trigger on that table and usurp the privileges of
> pg_read_all_settings, after which B can now create any number of
> objects owned by pg_read_all_settings.

I'm not seeing how this is possible. A trigger function would run with
the invoking user's privileges by default, right? So B would have to
create a trigger with a SECURITY DEFINER function, which is owned by
pg_read_all_settings to actually usurp the privileges of that role. But
creating objects with that owner is exactly the thing B can't do.

What am I missing?

Best

Wolfgang