I wrote: > Or in other words: not-superuser to superuser is far from the only > type of privilege escalation that we need to prevent.
After reflecting on that for a moment: maybe say that an event trigger fires for queries that are run by a role that the trigger's owning role is a member of? That changes nothing for superuser-owned triggers.
Can somebody remind me why triggers don't run as their owner in the first place?
It would make triggers way more useful, and eliminate the whole issue of trigger owners escalating to whomever tries to access the object on which the trigger is defined.
