Re: 8.4 release planning
От | KaiGai Kohei |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 8.4 release planning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 498032C8.4010105@kaigai.gr.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 8.4 release planning (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Richard Huxton wrote: > Greg Smith wrote: >> Where I suspect this is all is going to settle down into is that if 1) >> the SE GUC is on and 2) one of the tables in a join has rows filtered, >> then you can expect that a) it's possible that the result will leak >> information, which certainly need to be documented, > > As far as I can tell this is the case however you hide the information. > If you implemented it with views you'll have the same issue. If you hide > the existence of project p_id="TOPSECRET01" and people can run inserts > then they can spot it. Likewise, it you have fkey references to the row > then deletions can be used to spot it. > It is a covert channel discussion. At least, SE-PostgreSQL does not care about hiding its existence, so it does not prevent user to infer the existence of a tuple with same key value, using PK confliction. (Please note that he must have a info about PK value or lucky to make a key confliction.) But, it enables to prevent unclassified user to read the tuple, and him to know an info the tuple contains "p_id=TOPSECRET01" as a result of this read action. Thanks, -- KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: