Re: Default permissions of system catalogs

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "'Peter Eisentraut'" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Default permissions of system catalogs
Date: 2002-01-08 18:58:06
Message-ID: 200201081858.g08Iw6912221@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > Objections?
>
> I assume you are proposing the same privileges that you describe for a user
> table (i.e. by default only the owner (==superuser) has any access)?
>
> If so, this would break pgAdmin for any users who are not the superuser on
> their system as the majority of it's operation relies on examining the
> system catalogues. In this case I would *strongly* object.
>
> <thinks...> Surely this would also be the case for psql though - have I
> misunderstood something?

I assumed he was saying that the contents of pg_class permissions should
be interpreted the same whether it is a system table or not. He would
set the proper system table permissions so they are visible to all users
like it is now.

--
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 Bruce Momjian 2002-01-08 19:10:50 Strange results with date/interval arithmetic
Previous Message Barry Lind 2002-01-08 18:51:12 Re: [HACKERS] JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?