"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes: > On master, confirmed that after this command the privilege: > test_user=c/test_admin (on database testdb) still exists. That seems like > a bug. Its at least a POLA violation and I cannot figure out how to read > the revoke reference page in a way that explains it.
I believe what's going on there is explained by the rule that "grants and revokes done by a superuser are done as if issued by the object owner". So here, what would be revoked is test_user=c/postgres, which isn't the privilege at issue. Include GRANTED BY in the REVOKE to override the default choice of grantor.
The command in question did include "granted by" which is why this is a bug. The explicit granted by specification is being ignored if the invoking user is a superuser.
revoke connect on database testdb:v
from test_user:v
---------------
granted by test_admin:v;
---^^^^^^^^^
So if we stick with status quo behavior we'd need to write the following because the ignoring part is a POLA violation:
If a superuser chooses to issue a GRANT or REVOKE command, the command is performed as though it were issued by the owner of the affected object, and the granted by clause is ignored.
