Re: heads up -- subtle change of behavior of new initdb

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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.

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  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