use has_privs_of_role() for pg_hba.conf

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: use has_privs_of_role() for pg_hba.conf
Date: 2022-04-01 22:06:48
Message-ID: 20220401220648.GA615994@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi hackers,

6198420 ensured that has_privs_of_role() is used for predefined roles,
which means that the role inheritance hierarchy is checked instead of mere
role membership. However, inheritance is still not respected for
pg_hba.conf. Specifically, "samerole", "samegroup", and "+" still use

The attached patch introduces has_privs_of_role_nosuper() and uses it for
the aforementioned pg_hba.conf functionality. I think this is desirable
for consistency. If a role_a has membership in role_b but none of its
privileges (i.e., NOINHERIT), does it make sense that role_a should match
+role_b in pg_hba.conf? It is true that role_a could always "SET ROLE
role_b", and with this change, the user won't even have the ability to log
in to run SET ROLE. But I'm not sure if that's a strong enough argument
for deviating from the standard role privilege checks.


Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services:

Attachment Content-Type Size
v1-0001-Use-has_privs_of_role-for-samerole-samegroup-and-.patch text/x-diff 7.5 KB


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message wilfried roset 2022-04-01 22:16:59 Re: PROXY protocol support
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2022-04-01 21:03:05 Re: wrong fds used for refilenodes after pg_upgrade relfilenode changes Reply-To: