Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately we only have a single login role (it's a web app) and then we SET ROLE according to the contents of a JSON Web Token. So we end up with SESSION_USER as the logged in user and the active role as CURRENT_USER.
It may be that we're just stuck with a gap and need to just try and keep track of our mutation points, such as limit what is accessible through REST or GraphQL, and there is no way to fundamentally lock this down in Postgres. I was checking the mailing list to see if I'd missed anything.
That seems straightforward. Unfortunately I also want to know the user/role that performed the operation. If I use SECURITY DEFINER, I get the superuser account back from CURRENT_USER, not the actual user.
Sorry, should have included that in the original email. How do I restrict access while still retaining info about the current user/role?
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 5:47 PM <raf@raf.org> wrote:
Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 6/17/19 4:54 PM, Miles Elam wrote: > > Is there are way to restrict direct access to a table for inserts but > > allow a trigger on another table to perform an insert for that user? > > > > I'm trying to implement an audit table without allowing user tampering > > with the audit information. > > Would the below not work?: > CREATE the table as superuser or other privileged user > Have trigger function run as above user(use SECURITY DEFINER)
and make sure not to give any other users insert/update/delete permissions on the audit table.
