Re: Row Level Security − leakproof-ness and performance implications - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joe Conway
Subject Re: Row Level Security − leakproof-ness and performance implications
Date
Msg-id 3c272ee1-8b82-0538-96b8-6da10c193528@joeconway.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Row Level Security − leakproof-ness and performance implications  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Re: Row Level Security − leakproof-ness and performance implications
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/18/19 3:52 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 2019-02-28 00:03, Joe Conway wrote:
>> What if we provided an option to redact all client messages (leaving
>> logged messages as-is). Separately we could provide a GUC to force all
>> functions to be resolved as leakproof. Depending on your requirements,
>> having both options turned on could be perfectly acceptable.
>
> There are two commit fest entries for this thread, one in Pierre's name
> and one in yours.  Is your entry for the error message redacting
> functionality?  I think that approach has been found not to actually
> satisfy the leakproofness criteria.


It is a matter of opinion with regard to what the criteria actually is,
and when it ought to apply. But in any case the clear consensus was
against me, so I guess I'll assume "my patch was rejected by PostgreSQL
all I got was this tee shirt" (...I know I have one that says something
like that somewhere...) ;-)

I have no idea what the other entry is all about as I have not had the
time to look.

Joe

--
Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com
PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises
Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Rare SSL failures on eelpout
Next
From: Michael Banck
Date:
Subject: Re: Online verification of checksums