Re: SYSTEM_USER reserved word implementation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Drouvot, Bertrand
Subject Re: SYSTEM_USER reserved word implementation
Date
Msg-id ec5bd135-25a2-9cac-3f67-1a7dae2cbff3@amazon.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SYSTEM_USER reserved word implementation  (Jacob Champion <jchampion@timescale.com>)
Responses Re: SYSTEM_USER reserved word implementation  ("Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot@amazon.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 6/22/22 5:35 PM, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 8:10 AM Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> wrote:
>> On the contrary, I would argue that not having the identifier for the
>> external "user" available is a security concern. Ideally you want to be
>> able to trace actions inside Postgres to the actual user that invoked them.
> If auditing is also the use case for SYSTEM_USER, you'll probably want
> to review the arguments for making it available to parallel workers
> that were made in the other thread [1].

Thanks Jacob for your feedback.

I did some testing initially around the parallel workers and did not see 
any issues at that time.

I just had another look and I agree that the parallel workers case needs 
to be addressed.

I'll have a closer look to what you have done in [1].

Thanks

Bertrand

[1]https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/793d990837ae5c06a558d58d62de9378ab525d83.camel%40vmware.com




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: Make relfile tombstone files conditional on WAL level
Next
From: "Drouvot, Bertrand"
Date:
Subject: Re: Missing reference to pgstat_replslot.c in pgstat.c