Jan Wieck writes:
> Anyway, it's good to hear you're still on it. What's the
> estimated time you think it'll be ready to get patched in?
Next release. I would hope we can get the current stuff into beta in a
month or so, whereas this project would break open a lot of things.
> The thing users actually complain about is the requirement of
> UPDATE permissions to REFERENCE a table. This could be fixed
> with making RI triggers setuid functions for 7.1 and check
> that the user at least has SELECT permission on the
> referenced table during constraint creation. This would also
> remove the actual DOS problem, that a user could potentiall
> create a referencing table and not giving anyone who can
> update the referenced one update permissions on it too.
> I think it's worth doing it now, and couple it later with
> your general access control things.
True. I had already looked into this, it's not fundamentally difficult,
but there's a lot of code that will need to be touched.
If you want to go for it, be my guest; I agree that it is fairly
orthogonal to the rest of the privilege system. I'll put it on my priority
list if no one's taking it.
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2000-08-04 22:03:19|
|Subject: Re: Re: [GENERAL] random() function produces wrong range|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2000-08-04 21:59:44|
|Subject: Installation layout idea|