| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |
| Date: | 2016-02-17 23:02:38 |
| Message-ID: | 8073.1455750158@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> On 02/17/2016 02:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I thought we'd agreed on requiring superuser access for this function.
>> I concur that letting just anyone see the config data is inappropriate.
> It does not let anyone see config data out of the box:
> + CREATE VIEW pg_config AS
> + SELECT * FROM pg_config();
> +
> + REVOKE ALL on pg_config FROM PUBLIC;
> + REVOKE EXECUTE ON FUNCTION pg_config() FROM PUBLIC;
Ah, that's fine. I'd looked for a superuser() check and not seen one,
but letting the SQL permissions system handle it seems good enough.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | xujian | 2016-02-17 23:30:35 | pglogical - how to use pglogical.conflict_resolution |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2016-02-17 22:48:21 | Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions |