Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Martijn van Oosterhout
Subject Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)
Date
Msg-id 20081107215148.GA11469@svana.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 01:50:18PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> How will unique indexes work? Do you implicitly add security context as
> last column on every unique index, or does the uniqueness violation only
> occurs within security contexts, or does the uniqueness violation tested
> against all contextx that the inserter can currently see? Is there a
> change to system catalogs?

The wiki clearly states that the unique test is prior to any filtering.
Anything else seems crazy to me.

http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SEPostgreSQL#Unique_constraint

> Foreign Key deletions could be handled correctly if you treat them as
> updates. If we have the following example

Why? If a client does a delete and the database says OK, the tuple
should be gone, *for everyone*.

http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SEPostgreSQL#Foreign_Key_constraint

It is the responsibility of the DB administrator to worry about covert
channels.

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> Please line up in a tree and maintain the heap invariant while
> boarding. Thank you for flying nlogn airlines.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: TABLE command
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)