Re: CREATE POLICY and RETURNING

From: Zhaomo Yang <zmpgzm(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CREATE POLICY and RETURNING
Date: 2015-09-23 07:11:46
Message-ID: CALPr3ow+1NN1u-PLSmkBy07f0qsZ0ALxhz_Wt33s7YyYMNDn+Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Stephen,

It'd be great if others who are interested can help define the grammar
> changes necessary
> and perhaps even help with the code aspect of it.

I'd like to help on both. Can you elaborate a little bit more, especially
on the code aspect?

I don't buy that argument.

It is agreed that blind updates and deletes with RETURNING clause are
dangerous. It is quite similar here.
Instead of using
BEGIN
UPDATE-or-DELETE-with-RETURNING
ROLLBACK
as a substitute for SELECT, a malicious user can do a binary search with
some trick like divide-by-zero
to figure out rows he is not allowed to access. Of course, this is not as
serious as RETURNING, but it is still quite convenient for attackers.

Thanks,
Zhaomo

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2015-09-23 07:22:44 Re: Parallel Seq Scan
Previous Message Shulgin, Oleksandr 2015-09-23 06:27:40 Re: Calculage avg. width when operator = is missing