From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: heads up -- subtle change of behavior of new initdb |
Date: | 2003-11-14 12:27:51 |
Message-ID: | 87oevfnni0.fsf@stark.dyndns.tv |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> + if (!chmod(pg_data,0700))
Out of curiosity, what was the rationale for using 0700? I know it was a pain
for me when I had a script to monitor the tmp usage. Surely read access to
privileged users isn't really a problem? I'm thinking more of loosening the
paranoia check elsewhere rather than this default.
Wouldn't at least 0750 be safe? That way putting a user in the postgres group
would grant him access to be able to browse around and read the files in
pg_data.
Actually I should think 02750 would be better so that the group is inherited
by subdirectories.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-11-14 12:53:01 | Re: heads up -- subtle change of behavior of new initdb |
Previous Message | Petro Pelekh | 2003-11-14 12:04:56 | Re: Need help. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-11-14 12:53:01 | Re: heads up -- subtle change of behavior of new initdb |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-11-14 06:57:36 | Re: [HACKERS] heads up -- subtle change of behavior of new initdb |