From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION foo() TO bar(); |
Date: | 2017-02-22 08:07:12 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRC8crCE7Bgf=x6ic859FkNYH1YkCtpURMDyNoRxqHFtkw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2017-02-22 8:06 GMT+01:00 Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>:
> Hi Hackers,
>
> Currently, it's only possible to grant/revoke execute on functions to
> roles.
>
> I think it would be useful in many situations, both for documentation
> purposes,
> but also for increased security, to in a precise way control what
> other function(s)
> are allowed to execute a specific function.
> This would be useful for functions that are not supposed to be used
> manually by any human or any other function(s) than the few places
> where the function makes sense to use.
> Thoughts?
>
I had similar idea. The possibility to specify a list of functions can have
a performance impact when ACL can be too long.
Just idea - what is based on idea "using schema like package". We can
introduce new kind of functions X, that cannot be executed on toplevel -
and can be executed only from standard functions defined in same schema.
Usage of X functions can be locked in schema.
It allow similar functionality to your proposal, but the check can be
faster - and you don't need to maintain list of enabled caller functions.
Regards
Pavel
> /Joel
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2017-02-22 08:20:14 | Re: GRANT EXECUTE ON FUNCTION foo() TO bar(); |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-02-22 07:53:45 | Re: Replication vs. float timestamps is a disaster |