Re: plperl vs. plperlu

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plperl vs. plperlu
Date: 2004-07-10 13:05:39
Message-ID: 40EFE9A3.1070508@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


If trusted, the function is located inside a perl Safe container, a
mechanism designed for just this purpose. Try doing something forbidden
inside a trusted function (like opening a file) and you will see the error.

cheers

andrew

Jan Wieck wrote:

> while playing with the OSCON CD's, I noticed that the current version
> of plperl installs the same function handler for both, plperl and
> plperlu. I was wondering how it implements the important security
> difference or, in case it is not handled and both are in fact the
> same, who ignored this IMHO important difference in the naming
> convention of procedural languages.
>
>
> Jan
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jan Wieck 2004-07-10 14:04:48 Re: Recovery Features
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2004-07-10 12:38:04 plperl vs. plperlu