Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jelte Fennema-Nio
Subject Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema
Date
Msg-id CAGECzQS9JqWv+zJR-e-1JMH7GhCnLc4vD9H-uEui8E5Ba9Trpw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema  (Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Extension security improvement: Add support for extensions with an owned schema
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2 Sept 2025 at 02:03, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> wrote:
> One not too uncommon scenario is an extension in a dedicated schema that creates additional objects dynamically, for
instancecreating new partitions using triggers on one of the extension table.
 

Interesting. I didn't know there were extensions that did that. That
definitely doesn't seem like a very common pattern though.

But I don't think that's a problem for this idea. In the
implementation I'm working on, superuser would still be allowed to
create objects in such locked down owned schemas. So as long as the
extension upgrades its permissions to superuser during these DDLs it
should still be fine. (easy to do with SECURITY DEFINER or by
temporarily changing permissions from C)



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Yugo Nagata
Date:
Subject: Re: Allow to collect statistics on virtual generated columns
Next
From: Yura Sokolov
Date:
Subject: Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY bug: VACUUM sets frozenxid past a xid in async queue