Hi,
On 2021-04-12 16:37:01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> writes:
> > Currently only superuser is allowed to create LEAKPROOF functions
> > because leakproof functions can see tuples which have not yet been
> > filtered out by security barrier views or row level security
> > policies.
>
> Yeah.
>
> > But managed cloud services typically do not provide superuser roles.
>
> This is not a good argument for relaxing superuser requirements.
IDK. I may have been adjacent to people operating database-as-a-service
for too long, but ISTM there's decent reasons for (and also against) not
providing full superuser access. Even outside of managed services it
seems like a decent idea to split the "can execute native code" role
from the "administers an application" role. That reduces the impact a
bug in the application can incur.
There's certain things that are pretty intrinsically "can execute native
code", like defining new 'C' functions, arbitrary ALTER SYSTEM,
arbitrary file reads/writes, etc. Splitting them off from superuser is a
fools errand. But it's not at all clear why adding LEAKPROOF to
functions falls into that category?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
