Re: Potential security risk associated with function call

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jet <zhangchenxi(at)halodbtech(dot)com>
Cc: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Potential security risk associated with function call
Date: 2026-03-10 12:37:13
Message-ID: CAKFQuwZTDJLP1Wt821qk=ZEywkkRqpx+ou2EQKptAtwvFwLjmQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tuesday, March 10, 2026, Jet <zhangchenxi(at)halodbtech(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > It is the explicit responsibility of
> > the superuser to make sure the functions they create using untrusted
> > languages are correct and execute safely when called by PostgreSQL.
> But the question is how can a superuser know the "internal" and "c"
> functions
> implementation details? He will not know whether the code has
> !PG_ARGISNULL(...),
> and create a harmful function accidentally...

You describe the fundamental problem/risk of the entire software industry.
At least PostgreSQL has chosen a business model where the superuser has the
option to read the source code.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kirill Reshke 2026-03-10 12:39:28 Re: Potential security risk associated with function call
Previous Message Nazir Bilal Yavuz 2026-03-10 12:35:30 Re: Speed up COPY FROM text/CSV parsing using SIMD