pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Jordan Gigov <coladict@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Michael Banck <michael.banck@credativ.de>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 11:35:55 -0400
Message-ID: <8699.1501083355@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+nBocCTj5NAsrhEYOvY4YDo-Yg6YU5eAmhFq3NK+-K97MmxUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8f64786e-824d-7c0d-33a6-3d9e1c8e9fde@2ndquadrant.com>
	<edc1dc0d-66ba-0d9e-b0e7-890f064789d7@BlueTreble.com>
	<33b25c65-94f1-6ff6-c717-61a56294a255@2ndquadrant.com>
	<a537995b-ccdb-f668-5f67-98e9b9b4a99d@BlueTreble.com>
	<75409fb1-bd96-25c2-f6b0-c24e28ed2684@2ndquadrant.com>
	<65049c27-96bf-317b-b435-931f6041f94c@BlueTreble.com>
	<67d35333-ef65-074a-b2be-52440f245e43@2ndquadrant.com>
	<753dcafc-a648-9041-e9ca-e405cd4498f4@2ndquadrant.com>
	<20170306083342.GA8374@nighthawk.caipicrew.dd-dns.de>
	<2605f6d0-8444-528e-4e38-6b13968cfeb7@2ndquadrant.com>
	<20170306140101.GQ9812@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<28572.1500912583@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<18658.1501037135@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoYiUTPQGCjHYJ6DeiR1Qf-74XFO2Rp2WZnA88FdorZg6g@mail.gmail.com>
	<22969.1501075830@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+nBocCTj5NAsrhEYOvY4YDo-Yg6YU5eAmhFq3NK+-K97MmxUA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

Jordan Gigov <coladict@gmail.com> writes:
> But why should a superuser need the ACL to be applied before being allowed
> access? If you make the permission-checking function check if the user is a
> superuser before looking for per-user grants, wouldn't that solve the issue?

The superuser's permissions are not relevant, because the materialized
view is run with the permissions of its owner, not the superuser.
We are not going to consider changing that, either, because it would open
trivial-to-exploit security holes (any user could set up a trojan horse
matview and just wait for the next pg_upgrade or dump/restore).

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (29+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <8699.1501083355@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../8699.1501083355@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/8699.1501083355@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, coladict@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, sfrost@snowman.net, peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com, michael.banck@credativ.de, Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com, kgrittn@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: Change in "policy" on dump ordering?
  In-Reply-To: <8699.1501083355@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox