Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762
Date
Msg-id 20200624165016.GR3125@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical ()at walsender.c:2762  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 2020-Jun-24, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
>
> > In logical replication, a replication role is intended to be
> > accessible only to the GRANTed databases.  On the other hand the same
> > role can create a dead copy of the whole cluster, including
> > non-granted databases.
>
> In other words -- essentially, if you grant replication access to a role
> only to a specific database, they can steal the whole cluster.
>
> I don't see what's so great about that, but apparently people like it.

Sure, people who aren't in charge of security I'm sure like the ease of
use.

Doesn't mean it makes sense or that we should be supporting that.  What
we should have is a way to allow administrators to configure a system
for exactly what they want to allow, and it doesn't seem like we're
doing that today and therefore we should fix it.  This isn't the only
area we have that issue in.

Thanks,

Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] COPY command's data format option allows only lowercasecsv, text or binary
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and big data - FDW