Re: Non-superuser subscription owners - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Non-superuser subscription owners
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1Jh2xSMvZWzqNxjduyRoExHAL4c7ZVeESYdPHJxcqo8Bw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Non-superuser subscription owners  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Non-superuser subscription owners  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 10:37 PM Mark Dilger
<mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 2, 2021, at 1:29 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If we want to maintain the property that subscriptions can only be
> > owned by superuser for your first version then isn't a simple check
> > like ((!superuser()) for each of the operations is sufficient?
>
> As things stand today, nothing prevents a superuser subscription owner from having superuser revoked.  The patch does
nothingto change this.
 
>

I understand that but won't that get verified when we look up the
information in pg_authid as part of superuser() check?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Next
From: Peter Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: row filtering for logical replication