| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Harold Giménez <harold(at)heroku(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: hide application_name from other users |
| Date: | 2014-01-22 02:59:50 |
| Message-ID: | 25400.1390359590@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2014-01-21 20:00:51 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Don't know what folks think of removing those in-the-function checks in
>> favor of trusting the grant/revoke system to not allow those functions
>> to be called unless you have EXECUTE privileges on them..
> Well, they *do* return some information when called without superuser
> privileges. Just not all columns for all sessions. I don't think you can
> achieve that with anything in our permission system.
Yeah. We could replace blanket works-or-throws-error cases with
permission-to-call-the-function (and I see no reason not to).
But there are lots of cases where the current behavior is more
fine-grained than that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2014-01-22 03:09:42 | Re: Add %z support to elog/ereport? |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2014-01-22 02:49:41 | Re: dynamic shared memory and locks |