On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 06:01:00PM -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
> On 07/12/2012 02:53 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> >> As long as we're spending time on this, I'd propose getting rid of
> >> lanplistrusted, at least for access checking. Instead, just don't
> >> install USAGE privileges by default for those languages.
> > There's definitely something to that idea --- certainly lanpltrusted
> > dates from before we had a robust object-permissions system, and looks
> > like a bit of a wart now that we do have one.
> > I guess we could redefine the default privileges for languages as "none"
> > and then have the TRUSTED keyword mean to install public usage
> > privilege. Or maybe it would be safer for upgrade purposes if we kept
> > the default interpretation as-is and did an automatic REVOKE when
> > TRUSTED wasn't specified.
> I'll take a look at the latter option sometime in the next few weeks and
> submit for the next commitfest.
Any news on this?
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Joe Conway||Date: 2012-08-31 02:59:02|
|Subject: Re: has_language_privilege returns incorrect answer for
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2012-08-31 02:07:26|
|Subject: fairly useless psql compatibility warning?|