> On Nov 9, 2021, at 8:22 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>
> In terms of least-surprise, I do tend to think that the answer is "only
> care about what is explicitly put into the command"- that is, if it
> isn't in the CREATE ROLE statement then it gets left as-is. Not sure
> how others feel about that though.
bob: CREATE ROLE charlie;
bob: GRANT charlie TO david;
super_alice: CREATE OR REPLACE ROLE charlie SUPERUSER;
I think this is the sort of thing Tom and I are worried about. "david" is now a member of a superuser role, and it is
farfrom clear that "super_alice" intended that. Even if "bob" is not malicious, having this happen by accident is
prettybad.
If we fix the existing bug that the pg_auth_members.grantor field can end up as a dangling reference, instead making
surethat it is always accurate, then perhaps this would be ok if all roles granted into "charlie" had
grantor="super_alice". I'm not sure that is really good enough, but it is a lot closer to making this safe than
allowingthe command to succeed when role "charlie" has been granted away by someone else.
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
