Re: copy.c handling for RLS is insecure - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: copy.c handling for RLS is insecure
Date
Msg-id 20150709212141.GA12131@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: copy.c handling for RLS is insecure  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: copy.c handling for RLS is insecure  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
Noah, Andres,

* Andres Freund (andres@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2015-07-09 01:28:28 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > - Keep the OID check, shouldn't hurt to have it
> >
> > What benefit is left?
>
> A bit of defense in depth. We execute user defined code in COPY
> (e.g. BEFORE triggers). That user defined code could very well replace
> the relation. Now I think right now that'd happen late enough, so the
> second lookup already happened. But a bit more robust defense against
> that sounds good to me.

Attached patch keeps the relation locked, fully qualifies it when
building up the query, and uses list_member_oid() to check that the
relation's OID ends up in the resulting relationOids list (to address
Noah's point that the planner doesn't guarantee the ordering; I doubt
that list will ever be more than a few entries long).

Also removes the misguided Assert().

Barring objections, I'll commit this (and backpatch to 9.5) tomorrow.

    Thanks!

        Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL, RAISE and error context
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation