From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: function body actors (was: [PERFORM] viewing source code)
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:47:43 -0500
Message-ID: <6533.1198255663@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071221162441.GH10918@crankycanuck.ca>
References: <b42b73150712202109u26d05d01q4f1b8be8d29f763c@mail.gmail.com>
<20071221162441.GH10918@crankycanuck.ca>
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:09:28AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> Maybe a key management solution isn't required.
> I like this idea much better, because the same basic mechanism can be used
> for more than one thing, and it doesn't build in a system that is
> fundamentally weak. Of course, you _can_ build a weak system this way, but
> there's an important difference between building a fundamentally weak system
> and making weak systems possible.
I find myself unconvinced by this argument. The main problem is: how
do we know that it's possible to build a strong system atop this
mechanism? Just leaving it to non-security-savvy users seems to me
to be a great way to guarantee a lot of weak systems in the field.
ISTM our minimum responsibility would be to design and document how
to build a strong protection system using the feature ... and at that
point why not build it in?
I've certainly got no objection to making a mechanism that can be used
for more than one purpose; but not offering a complete security solution
is abdicating our responsibility.
regards, tom lane
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, ajs@crankycanuck.ca, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: function body actors (was: [PERFORM] viewing source code)
In-Reply-To: <6533.1198255663@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