Re: eval function
| От | Sim Zacks |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: eval function |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4E34DF18.9000300@compulab.co.il обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: eval function (Chris Travers <chris.travers@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: eval function
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
On 07/28/2011 06:28 PM, Chris Travers wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 8:08 AM, David Johnston<polobo@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> At best, based upon the example using "current_timestamp()", you could only >> mark it as being stable, right? >> >> Also not mentioned; what risk is there of this function being hacked? It >> places the supplied data within a "SELECT (....) AS column_alias" structure >> so it seems to be pretty safe but can you devise a string that would, say, >> delete data or something similar. I would expect the following: '1); DELETE >> FROM table; SELECT (2' to be dangerous. What functions would you use to >> make the input string safe? Does "quote_literal()" plug this hole? > I don't think the hole can be plugged. The point of the function is > to execute arbitrary sql code. That means doing SQL injection > purposely in the function. I don't think there is a way around it > because SQL injection is specifically what is desired, > > Best Wishes, > Chris Travers On one hand the hole can't be plugged because as you mentioned that is the point of the function. On the other hand, if the function is not being run as security definer, the account running it would need to have the rights to do whatever he is injecting. If "1); delete..." would work, then the user could just as easily do Delete... without using the function. The only problem that I see (correct me if I'm wrong) is anonymous injection through a user that has rights that we wouldn't want the actual user to have, which is not recommended in any case. Sim
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: