Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema
Date
Msg-id A313D9D2-E258-4FD6-9B80-647130B75B92@justatheory.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema  (Jelte Fennema-Nio <me@jeltef.nl>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Jun 19, 2024, at 13:50, Jelte Fennema-Nio <me@jeltef.nl> wrote:

> This indeed does sound like the behaviour that pretty much every
> existing extension wants to have. One small addition/clarification
> that I would make to your definition: fully qualified references to
> other objects should still be allowed.

Would be tricky for referring to objects from other extensions  with no defined schema, or are relatable.

> 1. To have a safe search_path that can be used in SET search_path on a
> function (see also [1]).
> 2. To make it easy for extension authors to avoid conflicts with other
> extensions/UDFs.

These would indeed be nice improvements IMO.

Best,

David





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema
Next
From: Jacob Champion
Date:
Subject: Re: Direct SSL connection and ALPN loose ends