| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Goulet, Dick" <DGoulet(at)vicr(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Doug Quale" <quale1(at)charter(dot)net>, "PostgreSQL Admin" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Installing PostgreSQL as "postgress" versus "root" Debate! |
| Date: | 2005-01-13 20:53:37 |
| Message-ID: | 200501132153.38075.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Goulet, Dick wrote:
> And in my book the executables are
> of zero value whereas the data files, and their contained data, are
> of infinite value. So under your scheme we're protecting the least
> valuable part of the system at the expense of the most valuable.
No, there is no expense in that sense. We are protecting as much as
possible while leaving as little as possible vulnerable. The fact that
the data files are owned by postgres is merely a necessary evil because
the database would otherwise be unusable. But there is no reason to
have more than that owned by postgres, even if it is of little value.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Doug Quale | 2005-01-13 21:04:00 | Re: Installing PostgreSQL as "postgress" versus "root" Debate! |
| Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-01-13 20:46:35 | Re: Installing PostgreSQL as "postgress" versus "root" Debate! |