Re: pre-proposal: permissions made easier

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pre-proposal: permissions made easier
Date: 2009-06-28 18:56:57
Message-ID: 11946.1246215417@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, 2009-06-28 at 14:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
>>> My idea is to have a "GRANT mask":
>>> CREATE ROLE foo_ro GRANT (SELECT ON TABLE, USAGE ON SCHEMA) FROM foo;
>>
>> You haven't really explained what "foo" is here.

> I meant for "foo" to be a user. "foo_ro" would be the read-only version,
> who has a strict subset of foo's permissions.

I see. It seems like rather a complicated (and expensive) mechanism
for a pretty narrow use-case. It'd only help for the cases where you
could define your permissions requirements that way. I agree that
there are some such cases, but I think real-world problems tend to be
a bit more complicated than that. I fear people would soon want
exceptions to the "strict subset" rule; and once you put that in,
the conceptual simplicity disappears, as does the ability to easily
verify what the set of GRANTs is doing.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2009-06-28 19:52:54 Re: pre-proposal: permissions made easier
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2009-06-28 18:36:25 Re: pre-proposal: permissions made easier