Re: allow building trusted languages without the untrusted versions

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: allow building trusted languages without the untrusted versions
Date: 2022-05-24 23:54:18
Message-ID: Yo1wKuifvjUfv4hb@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 02:10:19PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I guess one question is at what level we want to disable these various
> things. Your original proposal seemed reasonable to me because I feel
> like users who are compiling PostgreSQL ought to have control over
> which things they compile. If you can turn plperl and plperlu off
> together, and you can, then why shouldn't you be able to turn them on
> and off separately? I can't think of a good reason why we shouldn't
> make that possible if people want it, and evidently at least one
> person does: you. I'm even willing to assume that you represent the
> interests of some larger group of people. :-)

I always thought if pg_proc is able to call an arbitrary function in an
arbitrary library, it could access to the file system, and if that is
true, locking the super-user from file system access seems impossible
and unwise to try because it would give a false sense of security.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2022-05-25 00:08:49 Re: Limiting memory allocation
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-05-24 23:52:50 Re: suboverflowed subtransactions concurrency performance optimize