We're saying the same thing- non-admin user (superusers) can only install
untrusted languages. However, I didn't know you could grant rights to a
untrusted function. That is interesting because I thought the language's
trusted status was based on who owned the database. For instance, if I installed
Perl as untrusted into template1 wouldn't any user database based I create for
regular users (as the superuser but making them the database owner) run PL/Perl
functions as trusted?
The initial reason for my post is that I [thought] I saw some talk about writing
files as using PL/Perl instead of PL/Sh and I thought PL/Perl did not allow
regular users to write files to the file system, no?
Funny how 1 question leads to another- which is cool, 'cause I like to learn
some'n new everyday!
Quoting Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>:
> On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 10:06:36 -0400,
> Network Administrator <netadmin@vcsn.com> wrote:
> > I had a thought/question 'bout this since I was reading some stuff on
> triggers-
> > especially PL/Perl (sec. 21.4 in the 7.3 Programmer Docs). Isn't the
> simple
> > answer to this based on the fact that a PL installed as "trusted" will not
> allow
> > you to execute things that violate localization? Furthermore, if a
> language is
> > installed as "untrusted", doesn't it prevent non-admin users from using it?
> Or
> > is this only for PL/Perl?
>
> Untrusted languages can only be used by superusers.
>
--
Keith C. Perry
Director of Networks & Applications
VCSN, Inc.
http://vcsn.com
____________________________________
This email account is being host by:
VCSN, Inc : http://vcsn.com
