Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)

From: james <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)
Date: 2014-03-02 18:54:06
Message-ID: 53137E4E.4080108@mansionfamily.plus.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02/03/2014 15:30, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Terminal Services have definitely become more common over time, but
> with faster and cheaper virtualization, a lot of people have switched
> to that instead, which would remove the problem of course.
>
> I wonder how common it actually is, though, to *build postgres* on a
> terminal services machine with other users on it...
>
Well, the banks I've contracted at recently are all rather keen on
virtual desktops for developers, and some of those are terminal
services. We're a headache, and packaging up all the things we need is
a pain, so there is some mileage in buying grunty servers and doing
specific installs that are then shared, rather than making an MSI
generally available.

Also I have experience of being given accounts for jenkins etc that are
essentially terminal services logins, and having these things unable to
maintain a software stack can effectively disqualify tech we would
otherwise use.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marko Tiikkaja 2014-03-02 18:59:10 Re: proposal, patch: allow multiple plpgsql plugins
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-03-02 18:27:18 Re: Securing "make check" (CVE-2014-0067)