Re: leaky views, yet again

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: leaky views, yet again
Дата
Msg-id AANLkTinLXKvfBCXzfZCC-FzTJpR=nJ32yeWnzy7Z2yaT@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: leaky views, yet again  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: leaky views, yet again  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: leaky views, yet again  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Option #1: Remove all mention from the documentation of using views
>> for security purposes.  Don't allow views to have explicit permissions
>> attached to them; they are merely shorthand for a SELECT, for which
>> you either do or do not have privileges.
>
> The SQL standard requires us to attach permissions to views.  The
> standard makes no claims whatsoever about how leak-proof views should
> be; it only says that you can't call a view without the appropriate
> permissions.
>
> I do think it's reasonable for the docs to point out that views that do
> row-filtering should not be presumed to be absolutely bulletproof.
> That doesn't make permissions on them useless, so you're attacking a
> straw man.

Really?  I'm confused.  What is the use case for the status quo?

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: patch: SQL/MED(FDW) DDL
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: leaky views, yet again