Re: bootstrap pg_shseclabel in relcache initialization
От | Kouhei Kaigai |
---|---|
Тема | Re: bootstrap pg_shseclabel in relcache initialization |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9A28C8860F777E439AA12E8AEA7694F80116DF41@BPXM15GP.gisp.nec.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: bootstrap pg_shseclabel in relcache initialization (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: bootstrap pg_shseclabel in relcache initialization
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Joe Conway > Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 3:08 AM > To: Craig Ringer; Adam Brightwell > Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] bootstrap pg_shseclabel in relcache initialization > > On 11/08/2015 11:17 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > > On 9 November 2015 at 12:40, Adam Brightwell > > <adam.brightwell@crunchydata.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> While working on an auth hook, I found that I was unable to access the > >> pg_shseclabel system table while processing the hook. I discovered > >> that the only tables that were bootstrapped and made available at this > >> stage of the the auth process were pg_database, pg_authid and > >> pg_auth_members. Unfortunately, this is problematic if you have > >> security labels that are associated with a role which are needed to > >> determine auth decisions/actions. > >> > >> Given that the shared relations currently exposed can also have > >> security labels that can be used for auth purposes, I believe it makes > >> sense to make those available as well. I have attached a patch that > >> adds this functionality for review/discussion. If this functionality > >> makes sense I'll add it to the commitfest. > > > > Your reasoning certainly makes sense to me. I'm a little surprised > > this didn't cause issues for SEPostgreSQL already. > > Currently sepgsql at least does not support security labels on roles, > even though nominally postgres does. If the label provider does not > support them (as in sepgsql) you just get a "feature not supported" type > of error when trying to create the label. I'm not sure if there are any > other label providers in the wild other than sepgsql, but I should think > they would all benefit from this change. > The sepgsql does not support and its security model intends to assign client's privileges orthogonal to database role, thus, it didn't touch pg_shseclabel at that time. However, we can easily expect another label provider that references database role. > +1 for adding to the next commitfest. > Me also. Thanks, -- NEC Business Creation Division / PG-Strom Project KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: