Re: [ANNOUNCE] == PostgreSQL Weekly News - August 26 2007 ==

From: Joseph S <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] == PostgreSQL Weekly News - August 26 2007 ==
Date: 2007-08-27 17:34:43
Message-ID: fav1vj$2ui3$1@news.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-announce pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:
> Joseph S <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> writes:
>>> Tom Lane committed:
>>> - Restrict pg_relation_size to relation owner, pg_database_size to DB
>>> owner, and pg_tablespace_size to superusers. Perhaps we could
>>> weaken the first case to just require SELECT privilege, but that
>>> doesn't work for the other cases, so use ownership as the common
>>> concept.
>>>
>> Is there going to be a way to turn this off easily?
>
> No. If you want to make an argument for weaker restrictions than these,
> argue away, but security restrictions that can be "easily turned off"
> are no security at all.

I don't see how letting the size of a database or relation is a big
security risk. I do see how forcing me to login as the superuser to see
my db stats creates more of a security risk.

In response to

Browse pgsql-announce by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dmitry Narizhnykh 2007-08-27 20:22:07 ANN: DBForms from MS Access to PHP + PostgreSQL v.1.0 released
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-08-27 16:04:53 Re: [ANNOUNCE] == PostgreSQL Weekly News - August 26 2007 ==

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2007-08-27 17:52:44 Re: Tables dissapearing
Previous Message Kevin Neufeld 2007-08-27 17:32:24 PickSplit method of 2 columns ... error