Re: fixing CREATEROLE
От | Joe Conway |
---|---|
Тема | Re: fixing CREATEROLE |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 911a5c23-bd93-4848-3c26-245b3b667151@joeconway.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | fixing CREATEROLE (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/21/22 15:39, Robert Haas wrote: > I'm curious to hear what other people think of these proposals, but > let me first say what I think about them. First, I think it's clear > that we need to do something, because things right now are pretty > badly broken and in a way that affects security. Although these > patches are not back-patchable, they at least promise to improve > things as older versions go out of use. +1 > Second, it's possible that we should look for back-patchable fixes > here, but I can't really see that we're going to come up with > anything much better than just telling people not to use this feature > against older releases, because back-patching catalog changes or > dramatic behavior changes seems like a non-starter. In other words, I > think this is going to be a master-only fix. Yep, seems highly likely > Third, someone could well have a better or just different idea how to > fix the problems in this area than what I'm proposing here. This is > the best that I've been able to come up with so far, but that's not > to say it's free of problems or that no improvements are possible. On quick inspection I like what you have proposed and no significantly "better" ideas jump to mind. I will try to think on it though. > Finally, I think that whatever we do about the code, the documentation > needs quite a bit of work, because the code is doing a lot of stuff > that is security-critical and entirely non-obvious from the > documentation. I have not in this version of these patches included > any documentation changes and the regression test changes that I have > included are quite minimal. That all needs to be fixed up before there > could be any thought of moving forward with these patches. However, I > thought it best to get rough patches and an outline of the proposed > direction on the table first, before doing a lot of work refining > things. I have looked at, and even done some doc improvements in this area in the past, and concluded that it is simply hard to describe it in a clear, straightforward way. There are multiple competing concepts (privs on objects, attributes of roles, membership, when things are inherited versus not, settings bound to roles, etc). I don't know what to do about it, but yeah, fixing the documentation would be a noble goal. -- Joe Conway PostgreSQL Contributors Team RDS Open Source Databases Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: