Re: 8.4 release planning - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: 8.4 release planning
Date
Msg-id 497F54E9.9070507@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 8.4 release planning  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Responses Re: 8.4 release planning  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: 8.4 release planning  (Joshua Brindle <method@manicmethod.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Gregory Stark (stark@enterprisedb.com) wrote:
>> It does seem weird to simply omit records rather than throw an error and
>> require the user to use a where clause, even if it's something like WHERE
>> pg_accessible(tab).

The idea is for the level of informations security we're talking about, 
someone with limited permissions not only isn't allowed to know certain 
data, they're not allowed to know certain data *exists*.  Within the 
SELinux framework, this is accomplished by hiding files you don't have 
permission to see, not merely denying access to them.

The presumption is that if you know the data exists but can't access it 
directly, you'll use indirect methods to derive what it is.  But if you 
don't even know it exists, then you won't look for it.

There's a level above that which I don't think SEPostgres implements, 
which is data substitution, in which you see different data according to 
what security level you are.  While this may seem insane for a business 
application, for military-support applications it makes some sense.

--Josh


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zdenek Kotala
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_upgrade project status
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Hot standby, recovery infrastructure