Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bharath Rupireddy
Subject Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
Date
Msg-id CALj2ACVH-fhO5htnM2UbV7mvP3+0+zYHBamCTC8KWTtSb5+8=g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:20 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:06 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 2:57 PM Bharath Rupireddy
> > <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 2:44 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > +1 for the idea.  I did not read the complete patch but while reading
> > > > through the patch, I noticed that you using elevel as LOG for printing
> > > > the stack trace.  But I think the backend whose pid you have passed,
> > > > the connected client to that backend might not have superuser
> > > > privileges and if you use elevel LOG then that message will be sent to
> > > > that connected client as well and I don't think that is secure.  So
> > > > can we use LOG_SERVER_ONLY so that we can prevent
> > > > it from sending to the client.
> > >
> > > True, we should use LOG_SERVER_ONLY and not send any logs to the client.
> >
> > I further tend to think that, is it correct to log queries with LOG
> > level when log_statement GUC is set? Or should it also be
> > LOG_SERVER_ONLY?
> >
> >     /* Log immediately if dictated by log_statement */
> >     if (check_log_statement(parsetree_list))
> >     {
> >         ereport(LOG,
> >                 (errmsg("statement: %s", query_string),
> >                  errhidestmt(true),
> >                  errdetail_execute(parsetree_list)));
>
> What is your argument behind logging it with LOG? I mean we are
> sending the signal to all the backend and some backend might have the
> client who is not connected as a superuser so sending the plan to
> those clients is not a good idea from a security perspective.
> Anyways, LOG_SERVER_ONLY is not an exposed logging level it is used
> for an internal purpose.  So IMHO it should be logged with
> LOG_SERVER_ONLY level.

I'm saying that -  currently, queries are logged with LOG level when
the log_statement GUC is set. The queries might be sent to the
non-superuser clients. So, your point of "sending the plan to those
clients is not a good idea from a security perspective" gets violated
right? Should the log level be changed(in the below code) from "LOG"
to "LOG_SERVER_ONLY"? I think we can discuss this separately so as not
to sidetrack the main feature.

    /* Log immediately if dictated by log_statement */
    if (check_log_statement(parsetree_list))
    {
        ereport(LOG,
                (errmsg("statement: %s", query_string),
                 errhidestmt(true),
                 errdetail_execute(parsetree_list)));

With Regards,
Bharath Rupireddy.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: subscriptioncheck failure
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Executor code - found an instance of a WHILE that should just be an IF