| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com>, "sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net" <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Delegating superuser tasks to new security roles (Was: Granting control of SUSET gucs to non-superusers) |
| Date: | 2021-10-20 19:09:08 |
| Message-ID: | d00be2e935ae191a12bea494c7151a1b19343bf7.camel@j-davis.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 23:06 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> pg_logical_replication would not be safe to delegate that way:
>
https://postgr.es/m/flat/CACqFVBbx6PDq%2B%3DvHM0n78kHzn8tvOM-kGO_2q_q0zNAMT%2BTzdA%40mail.gmail.com
What do you mean "that way"? Do you mean it's not safe to delegate
subscription creation to non-superusers at all?
From the thread above, I don't see anything so dangerous that it can't
be delegated:
* persistent background workers on subscriber
- still seems reasonable to delegate to a privileged user
* arbitrary code execution by the apply worker on subscriber
- apply worker runs as subscription owner, so doesn't seem
like a problem?
* connection info may be visible to non-superusers
- seems either solvable or not necessarily a problem
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2021-10-20 19:27:48 | Re: Interrupts vs signals |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2021-10-20 19:06:41 | Re: Split xlog.c |