Re: Protection from SQL injection

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Protection from SQL injection
Date: 2008-04-29 20:55:21
Message-ID: 20080429205520.GF4515@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 04:33:01PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

> Moreover, it seems unlikely that it will even cover the field. A partial
> cloak might indeed be worse than none, in that it will give some developers
> an illusion of having security.

I think this is a really important point, and one that isn't getting
enough attention in this discussion. Half a security measure is
almost always worse than none at all, exactly because people stop
thinking they have to worry about that area of security at all. I
think without a convincing argument that the proposal will even come
close to covering most SQL injection cases, it's a bad idea.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2008-04-29 21:10:20 Re: Protection from SQL injection
Previous Message Steve Crawford 2008-04-29 20:34:19 psql \pset pager