Re: Security implications of config-file-location patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Security implications of config-file-location patch
Date
Msg-id 8148.1097213899@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Security implications of config-file-location patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> Good point.  Should we obscure pg_tablespace similarly to what we do for
>> pg_shadow?

> Well, if we feel file locations are better left only visible to
> super-users, we should.  However, when managing disk space, aren't
> normal users also often interested in which disk drives will store their
> data?  I don't see a big value to obscuring pgdata myself.

My gut feeling is that it's more important to obscure pgdata than the
external tablespace locations, basically because non-default tablespaces
are likely to be on secondary disks with no particular relationship to
interesting files (such as ~postgres/.profile).  I can't back this up
with a hard argument at this late hour though ...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gavin Sherry
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1
Next
From: Oliver Jowett
Date:
Subject: Re: Two-phase commit