Re: Problem with function permission test in a view

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Someone asked me a question about view and function permissions.  I
> > assumed all object access done by a view would be based on the
> > permissions on the view, and not the permissions of the objects.
> 
> Table references are checked according to the owner of the view, but use
> in a view does not change the execution context for function or operator
> calls.  This is how it's always been done.
> 
> > Is this a bug?
> 
> Changing it would be a major definitional change (and a pretty major
> implementation change too).  It might be better, but please don't
> pre-judge the issue by labeling it a bug.

Well, it sure sounds like a bug.  What logic is there that table access
use the view permissions, but not function access?  Could we just use
SECURITY DEFINER for function calls in views?

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073