Re: Re: [PATCHES] Fw: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole - Solution Proposal

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joe Conway <joe(at)conway-family(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] Fw: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole - Solution Proposal
Date: 2001-06-13 21:14:38
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0106132312260.756-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane writes:

> What I suggest we do is apply the portions of Joe's latest patch that
> support has_table_privilege with OID inputs and with NAME inputs,
> omitting the combinations that take TEXT inputs and do casefolding.
> We can add that part later if it proves that people do indeed want it.

Okay.

> We will probably have to revisit this territory when we implement
> schemas: there will need to be a way to input qualified table names
> like foo.bar, and a way to input NON qualified names like "foo.bar".
> But we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

I figured we would add another argument to the function.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message The Hermit Hacker 2001-06-13 21:24:10 RE: vacuum
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-06-13 21:09:20 Re: create user problem

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rainer Mager 2001-06-13 22:37:57 High memory usage
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-06-13 21:06:59 Re: sequence.c compile failure