On 7 September 2011 14:34, Kohei KaiGai
<kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp> wrote:
2011/9/7 Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>:
> On 24 August
2011 13:38, Kohei Kaigai <
Kohei.Kaigai@emea.nec.com> wrote:
>>
>> The (2) is new stuff from the revision in commit-fest 1st. It enables to
>> supply "NOLEAKY" option on CREATE FUNCTION statement, then the function is
>> allowed to distribute across security barrier. Only superuser can set this
>> option.
>
> "NOLEAKY" doesn't really sound appropriate as it sounds like pidgin English.
> Also, it could be read as "Don't allow leaks in this function". Could we
> instead use something like TRUSTED or something akin to it being allowed to
> do more than safer functions? It then describes its level of behaviour
> rather than what it promises not to do.
>
Thanks for your comment. I'm not a native English specker, so it is helpful.
"TRUSTED" sounds meaningful for me, however, it is confusable with a concept
of "trusted procedure" in label-based MAC. It is not only SELinux,
Oracle's label
based security also uses this term to mean a procedure that switches user's
credential during its execution.
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/network.111/b28529/storproc.htm
So, how about "CREDIBLE", instead of "TRUSTED"?
I can't say I'm keen on that alternative, but I'm probably not the one to participate in bike-shedding here, so I'll leave comment to you hackers. :)
--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935
EnterpriseDB UK:
http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company