Re: Row-security writer-side checks proposal - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Row-security writer-side checks proposal
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZPBSgcr=XD=pjUEptP2+h34nnM3MA-_55u-qqCob+J+w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Row-security writer-side checks proposal  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 11/08/2013 11:03 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> > Separate "READ DELETE" etc would only be interesting if we wanted to let
>>> > someone DELETE rows they cannot SELECT. Since we have DELETE ...
>>> > RETURNING, and since users can write a predicate function for DELETE
>>> > that leaks the information even if we didn't, in practice if you give
>>> > the user any READ right you've given them all of them. So I don't think
>>> > we can support that (except maybe by column RLS down the track).
>>
>> Well, we could require SELECT privilege when a a RETURNING clause is present...
>
> Absolutely could. Wouldn't stop them grabbing the data via a predicate
> function on the update/delete, though, and we can't sanely (IMO) require
> SELECT rights if they want to use non-LEAKPROOF functions/operators either.

Hmm, good point.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgresql c function returning one row with 2 fileds
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Clang 3.3 Analyzer Results