Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 565.1331876745@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> But actually I don't see what you hope to gain from such a change,
>> even if it can be made to work. �Anyone who can do kill(SIGINT) can
>> do kill(SIGKILL), say --- so you have to be able to trust the signal
>> sender. �What's the point of not trusting it to verify the client
>> identity?
> No longer true with pg_cancel_backend not-by-superuser, no?
No. That doesn't affect the above argument in the least. And in fact
if there's any question whatsoever as to whether unprivileged
cross-backend signals are secure, they are not going in in the first
place.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: