| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, digoal(at)126(dot)com |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #9210: PostgreSQL string store bug? not enforce check with correct characterSET/encoding |
| Date: | 2014-02-21 22:20:06 |
| Message-ID: | 19842.1393021206@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 08:22:13PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> How much of this is back-patch material, do you think?
> None of it. While many of the failures to validate against a character
> encoding are clear bugs, applications hum along in spite of such bugs and
> break when we tighten the checks. I don't see a concern to override that
> here. Folks who want the tighter checking have some workarounds available.
That's certainly a reasonable position to take concerning the changes for
outside-a-transaction behavior. However, I think there's a case to be
made for adding the additional pg_verify_mbstr() calls in the back
branches. We've been promising since around 8.3 that invalidly encoded
data can't get into a database, and it's disturbing to find that there
are leaks in that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Noah Misch | 2014-02-21 23:43:32 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: BUG #9210: PostgreSQL string store bug? not enforce check with correct characterSET/encoding |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-02-21 17:03:33 | Re: Uninterruptable regexp_replace in 9.3.1 ? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-02-21 23:02:32 | Re: Storing the password in .pgpass file in an encrypted format |
| Previous Message | Daniel Farina | 2014-02-21 22:18:19 | Re: Storing the password in .pgpass file in an encrypted format |