From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Security information page |
Date: | 2005-11-28 19:56:58 |
Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE92E8B6@algol.sollentuna.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
> >> Personally I think we shouldn't make the latter claim, anyway: for
> >> example, whether COALESCE(NULL, NULL) dumping core (fixed
> in 8.0.3)
> >> is a "security issue"
> >> is often in the eye of the beholder.
>
> > If we (the PGDG) beleive that is a security issue, it
> should be on the
> > list. And it should be back-patched to other stable branches - has
> > this been done?
>
> 2005-04-10 16:57 tgl
>
> * src/backend/optimizer/util/: clauses.c
> (REL7_4_STABLE), clauses.c
> (REL8_0_STABLE), clauses.c: Make constant-folding produce sane
> output for COALESCE(NULL,NULL), that is a plain NULL and not a
> COALESCE with no inputs. Fixes crash reported by Michael
> Williamson.
>
> It wasn't back-patched further because earlier versions don't
> have the bug.
Rihgt. Added to the list.
> In general, I think we consider any potential server core
> dump to be a security issue, if it can be provoked by
> unprivileged users. Even if it's not exploitable in any
> other way, denial-of-service is still a security concern.
Seems like a good policy to me.
Anybody have anything else to add to the list?
//Magnus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-11-28 19:58:38 | Re: svr2/unionfs |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2005-11-28 14:48:06 | Re: svr2/unionfs |