Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1txF6z-005Lis-Kn for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:59:17 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1txF6y-00CgJb-9i for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:59:16 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1txF6y-00CgE2-2A for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:59:16 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1txF6w-0018ye-1c for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:59:15 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 52Q0xC7u1349038; Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:59:12 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Peter Eisentraut cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: pgsql: postgres_fdw: improve security checks In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut message dated "Mon, 24 Mar 2025 15:01:37 -0000" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1349036.1742950752.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 20:59:12 -0400 Message-ID: <1349037.1742950752@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Peter Eisentraut writes: > postgres_fdw: improve security checks This patch is failing on "drongo" [1]. It looks like the problem is that the pg_hba.conf file being used doesn't allow for TCP loopback connections. To make that safe, the test would have to be changed to not run by default. We could gate it with a PG_TEST_EXTRA check ... but the end result would likely be that it gets run by just about nobody. I wonder whether it's worth the trouble. regards, tom lane [1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=3Ddrongo&dt=3D= 2025-03-25%2002%3A11%3A12