Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 7.4 Press Release -- Draft #4

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7.4 Press Release -- Draft #4
Date: 2003-07-28 20:15:31
Message-ID: 1059423331.22259.818.camel@camel (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Sat, 2003-07-26 at 21:31, Gavin Sherry wrote:
> > >    - Read only transactions, bringing a greater level of security to web and 
> > >      enterprise applications by protecting data from modification.
> 
> This should be removed. Even though I added it to the press release, I've
> just realised it's not really a security measure against SQL injection
> since injected code can just specify 'SET TRANSACTION READ WRITE'. We
> should still mention it, but not as a security measure.
> 

Aside from spec compliance, whats the bonus for having it then? Or put a
better way, why/when would I want to use this?

Robert Treat
-- 
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL


In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Nick FankhauserDate: 2003-07-28 20:49:14
Subject: Re: 7.4 Press Release -- starting Draft #5
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2003-07-28 17:52:24
Subject: 7.4 Press Release

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group