From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Matthew Horoschun <mhoroschun@canprint.com.au>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Controlling access to Sequences
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 23:09:31 -0500
Message-ID: <4109.1044072571@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2759DB60-351A-11D7-92E5-000393B3A702@canprint.com.au>
References: <2759DB60-351A-11D7-92E5-000393B3A702@canprint.com.au>
Matthew Horoschun <mhoroschun@canprint.com.au> writes:
> My understanding is that I need to GRANT the UPDATE privilege on the
> SEQUENCE if I want a user to be able to to use nextval() on it. The
> trouble is, if they can do a nextval() they can also do a setval()
So? With enough time on your hands, you can apply nextval() often
enough to get from any point A to any point B. It seems illusory
to think that forbidding setval() makes things more secure.
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, mhoroschun@canprint.com.au
Subject: Re: Controlling access to Sequences
In-Reply-To: <4109.1044072571@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