Re: security definer default for some PL languages (SQL/PSM)?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: security definer default for some PL languages (SQL/PSM)?
Дата
Msg-id 13058.1168188450@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на security definer default for some PL languages (SQL/PSM)?  ("Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@hotmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
"Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@hotmail.com> writes:
> SQL/PSM default for SQL procedures are SECURITY DEFINER (like views), but 
> PostgreSQL default is SECURITY CALLLER. Is acceptable to define security 
> flag in dependency to used language?

I'd vote no, even if Peter is wrong and you're right about what the spec
says.  A PL gets to set the rules within its function body, not outside.
Next you'll be telling us that the standard requires that the CREATE
FUNCTION not use a dollar-quoted function body ... to which the answer
will be "too bad".  I think the principle of least surprise dictates
that security properties shouldn't be inconsistent across PLs.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: proposal: catch warnings
Следующее
От: "Pavel Stehule"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: security definer default for some PL languages (SQL/PSM)?