Re: Post-CVE Wishlist - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Post-CVE Wishlist
Date
Msg-id 187118.1637783609@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Post-CVE Wishlist  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Post-CVE Wishlist
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I think it would take an overwhelming amount of evidence to convince
> the project to remove support for the current method. One or even two
> or three high-severity bugs will probably not convince the project to
> do more than spend more studying that code and trying to tighten
> things up in a systematic way.

One other point to be made here is that it seems like a stretch to call
these particular bugs "high-severity".  Given what we learned about
the difficulty of exploiting the libpq bug, and the certainty that any
other clients sharing the issue would have their own idiosyncrasies
necessitating a custom-designed attack, I rather doubt that we're going
to hear of anybody trying to exploit the issue in the field.

(By no means do I suggest that these bugs aren't worth fixing when we
find them.  But so far they seem very easy to fix.  So moving mountains
to design out just this one type of bug doesn't seem like a great use
of our finite earth-moving capacity.)

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Split xlog.c
Next
From: Jacob Champion
Date:
Subject: Re: Post-CVE Wishlist