Re: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Mark Volpe <volpe(dot)mark(at)epa(dot)gov>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Setuid functions
Date: 2001-06-23 15:48:20
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0106231732430.724-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Mark Volpe writes:

> This patch will implement the "ENABLE PRIVILEGE" and "DISABLE PRIVILEGE"
> commands in PL/pgSQL, which, respectively, change the effective uid to that
> of the function owner and back.

May I suggest better names? When I do DISABLE PRIVILEGE, do I no longer
have any privilege? Also, in SQL, the term "privilege" refers to
select/insert/update/etc. right on some table, so "enable privilege" would
be "grant". The term for user identity is "authorization", so I would
call these commands

SET AUTHORIZATION { INVOKER | DEFINER }

("invoker" and "definer" are part of the SQL CREATE FUNCTION syntax) and
the default would be invoker.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-06-23 15:51:42 Re: Good name for new lock type for VACUUM?
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2001-06-23 14:39:39 RE: Good name for new lock type for VACUUM?