| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions |
| Date: | 2004-07-23 22:19:32 |
| Message-ID: | 28717.1090621172@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm pretty much against allowing configuration editing from remote
>> altogether.
> Why can't they just use COPY to replace the contents of pg_hba.conf now?
If you've write-protected it, that doesn't work.
Also, COPY insists on an absolute path, and if the attacker doesn't know
the value of $PGDATA or $HOME then he'll have some difficulty doing
anything much with it. I thought that the handy default of $PGDATA in
the proposed functions was pretty unwise all by itself --- if they don't
require absolute paths then that's still another new door we'll be opening.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-07-23 22:20:05 | Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-23 22:15:01 | Re: logfile subprocess and Fancy File Functions |