Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations.

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations.
Date: 2023-06-13 20:23:24
Message-ID: 1799839.1686687804@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> Best argument for shipping without $SUBJECT: we already have REFERENCES and
> TRIGGER privilege that tend to let the grantee hijack the table owner's
> account. Adding MAINTAIN to the list, while sad, is defensible. I still
> prefer to ship with $SUBJECT, not without.

What I'm concerned about is making such a fundamental semantics change
post-beta1. It'll basically invalidate any application compatibility
testing anybody might have done against beta1. I think this ship has
sailed as far as v16 is concerned, although we could reconsider it
in v17.

Also, I fail to see any connection to the MAINTAIN privilege: the
committed-and-reverted patch would break things whether the user
was making any use of that privilege or not. Thus, I do not accept
the idea that we're fixing something that's new in 16.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2023-06-13 20:55:13 Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations.
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2023-06-13 20:22:01 Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joel Jacobson 2023-06-13 20:23:57 Re: Do we want a hashset type?
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2023-06-13 20:22:01 Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations.