Re: plperl Safe restrictions

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> The question in my mind is "What are we protecting against?" ISTM it is 
> the use of the pl as a vector to attack the machine and postgres. Does a 
> segfault come into that category? After all, isn't it one of postgres's 
> strengths that we can survive individual backends crashing?

Yeah, but a repeatable segfault certainly is an adequate tool for a
denial-of-service attack, since it takes out everyone else's sessions
along with your own.  A possibly larger objection is how sure can you be
that the effects will *only* be a segfault, and not say the ability to
execute some user-injected machine code.
        regards, tom lane