Re: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole?
Date: 2001-05-07 23:36:13
Message-ID: 200105072336.f47NaD511077@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Sounds fine, but aren't most people who we ask for stats superusers?
>
> Are they? I don't think we should assume that.

OK, just asking.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message mlw 2001-05-07 23:44:00 create database name with location = 'path';
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-05-07 23:35:52 Re: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole?