Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL
От | Jim Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 54C28EE6.3070006@BlueTreble.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/21/15 6:50 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> I'm still nervous about overloading this onto the roles system; I think it will end up being very easy to accidentallybreak. But if others think it'll work then I guess I'm just being paranoid. > Break in which way..? If you're saying "it'll be easy for a user to > misconfigure" then I might agree with you- but documentation and > examples can help to address that. I'm worried about user misconfiguration. Setting up a good system of roles (as in, distinguishing between application accounts,users, account(s) used to deploy code changes, DBAs, etc) is already tricky because of all the different use casesto consider. I fear that adding auditing to that matrix is just going to make it worse. I do like Robert's idea of role:action:object triplets more, though I'm not sure it's enough. For example, what happens ifyou CREATE ROLE su SUPERUSER NOINHERIT NOLOGIN; CREATE ROLE su_role IN ROLE su NOLOGIN; GRANT su_role TO bob; and have su_role:*:* Does bob get audited all the time then? Only when he does SET ROLE su? For that matter, how does SET ROLE affect auditing? -- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: