Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> No, you don't. That allows non-superusers to give away object
>> ownership, which is well-established as a security hole; Unix
>> filesystems stopped doing it years ago.
> I worded that badly. I meant "allow a user to change the owner of
> something to what it already is". ie. Just make the no-op allowed by
> everyone. session_auth already does this.
Ah. Okay, no objection to that. (In fact I believe we put in the
special case for session_auth for exactly the same reason.)
regards, tom lane