Re: AW: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions

From: Mark Volpe <volpe(dot)mark(at)epa(dot)gov>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: AW: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions
Date: 2001-06-25 13:19:27
Message-ID: 3B373A5F.15FD771@epa.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Actually, I liked the SET AUTHORIZATION { DEFINER | INVOKER } terminology
mentioned earlier.

Mark

Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
>
> > > This patch will implement the "ENABLE PRIVILEGE" and "DISABLE PRIVILEGE"
> > > commands in PL/pgSQL, which, respectively, change the effective uid to that
> > > of the function owner and back. It doesn't break security (I hope). The
> > > commands can be abbreviated as "ENABLE" and "DISABLE" for the poor saps that
>
> Anybody else want to object to this abbreviation idea ? Seems
> reading ENABLE; or DISABLE; is very hard to interpret in source code
> (enable what ?) and should thus not be allowed (or allow "ENABLE PRIV").
>
> Andreas
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-25 13:41:13 Re: AW: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2001-06-25 13:15:04 Re: Setuid functions