On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 6:09 PM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > To me, this seems more accidental than the natural fallout of good design.
>
> I disagree that the privilege design for FDWs was accidental.
That seems like a stronger statement than the one I made...
> What I see differently is that the purview of those decisions should be
> that of the DB owner and not the superuser.
Yeah, I don't agree with that at all. If I'm a hosting provider, I
want to tell my customers what they're allowed to run and what they're
not allowed to run, but I don't want them to have to call me when they
want to run an extension I've decided is OK.
> As it relates to things in contrib that could be classified as 'a pile
> of crap' or 'too experimental'- that's *our* failing, and one which we
> should accept and address instead of punting on it.
I don't think changing what's in contrib helps much. Even if we rm
-rf'd it, there's the same problem with out-of-core extensions. Joe
Extensionman may think his extension ought to be trusted, and package
it as such, but Paula Skepticaldba is entitled to think Joe's view of
the security risks originating from his code is overly rosy.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
