Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 565.1331876745@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role (Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pg_terminate_backend for same-role
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com> writes: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> But actually I don't see what you hope to gain from such a change, >> even if it can be made to work. �Anyone who can do kill(SIGINT) can >> do kill(SIGKILL), say --- so you have to be able to trust the signal >> sender. �What's the point of not trusting it to verify the client >> identity? > No longer true with pg_cancel_backend not-by-superuser, no? No. That doesn't affect the above argument in the least. And in fact if there's any question whatsoever as to whether unprivileged cross-backend signals are secure, they are not going in in the first place. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: