Re: WAL file location - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Lamar Owen |
---|---|
Subject | Re: WAL file location |
Date | |
Msg-id | 200207302318.16830.lamar.owen@wgcr.org Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: WAL file location (Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net>) |
Responses |
Re: WAL file location
Re: WAL file location |
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday 30 July 2002 07:46 pm, Curt Sampson wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, Lamar Owen wrote: > > I said it. In any case, using strings that are in the environment > > requires an untrusted PL, or a C function. > Ah. See, we already have a failure in a security analysis here. This > command: > CREATE DATABASE foo WITH LOCATION = 'BAR' > uses a string that's in the environment. And requires you to be a database superuser anyway. You got something better? :-) If you're the database superuser, you can do anything you want inside the database. Your analysis here is faulty. > So what you're saying is that we should make the opportunity for people > to configure the system in an insecure manner? No, what I'm saying is that there is no such thing as absolute security -- and time is better spent where there is a measureable result. If a security hole requires root to exploit, then it's not a hole. Show me a case where an envvar can be exploited by an unprivileged database user without accessing a user written C function or some other function in an untrusted PL. > Configuration errors by administrators are probably the number one > cause of security breaches, you know. No. Failure to keep up with security updates is the number one cause of security breaches. I guess you could call that a configuration problem of sorts. Been there; done that. Experienced one hack in -- caught it in the act. But I _have_ been there, and I have had to clean up other people's configuration errors. > I've been securing systems since I started an ISP in 1995, and so I've > seen a lot of security vulnerabilities come and go, and I've got a bit > of a feel for what kinds of things are typically exploited. And this one > one just screams, "potential security vulnerability!" to me. But, just like any other vulnerability, an admin must ask the question 'is a successful exploit a problem?' Again, if an exploit requires root to activate, then it's not a problem in reality. If I have to be the database superuser to activate an ennvar exploit in postgresql, then it's not a vulnerability, as I have more powerful tools at my disposal as superuser. Things such as DROP DATABASE. Now if a normal user can easily exploit it remotely (like the two in a row for OpenBSD in the past month), then it's an issue. A big issue. You just have to keep perspective. And I'm not going to put myself as any authority on the subject, but I do have a couple of years in the trenches, having admined systems for over 15 years. I've been at it long enough to realize that I am most certainly fallible. -- Lamar Owen WGCR Internet Radio 1 Peter 4:11
pgsql-hackers by date: