Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Roman Eskin <r(dot)eskin(at)arenadata(dot)io>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Avoid orphaned objects dependencies, take 3
Date: 2026-06-17 05:44:47
Message-ID: ajI0Tz9dIJvLGHNY@bdtpg
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 12:14:12PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2026-06-16 at 10:09 +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > 0002: fixes it by moving aclcheck_track_record() to after the
> > permission check
> > succeeds in object_aclcheck_ext() and pg_class_aclcheck_ext().
> > Indeed, there is
> > no need to track failed permission checks.
>
> IIUC, this is necessary for correctness. If an ACL failure doesn't
> cause a transaction abort, then there's a danger that we cause the
> transaction to fail that should have succeeded.

Exactly, because we'd recheck an "harmless" failed ACL check and then produce
an error.

> So the ACL tracking needs to be precise: we can't track an ACL check
> unless a failure always causes transaction abort; and we must track an
> ACL check if it would cause a transaction abort. Right?

I would say: we just need to track (and recheck) ACL checks that succeeded.

I think that there is no reason to recheck (and so to record) a failed ACL as what
we are dealing with here is the TOCTOU window. Re-checking a failed ACL check would
handle cases when a GRANT has been given during the TOCTOU window which is not
useful (for our protection goal) compared to re-checking a REVOKE during the
TOCTOU window (as the latter would record a dependency on an object we don't have
permission on).

Doing so, as proposed in 0002, allows us to fix the "re-check a harmless failed
ACL bug" (demonstrated by the added test) and still protect us for REVOKE during
the TOCTOU window.

Thoughts?

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Richard Guo 2026-06-17 05:51:45 Re: assertion failure with unique index + partitioning + join
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2026-06-17 05:42:21 Re: faulty error handling around pgstat_count_io_op_time()