Re: How to have a blind-superuser
От | Steve Atkins |
---|---|
Тема | Re: How to have a blind-superuser |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AE408BAC-5947-442B-A014-1F9ADE066D47@blighty.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: How to have a blind-superuser ("Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: How to have a blind-superuser
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Apr 24, 2006, at 6:31 PM, Qingqing Zhou wrote: > > ""Jim C. Nasby"" <jnasby@pervasive.com> wrote >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 06:16:30PM +0800, Qingqing Zhou wrote: >>> Is it possible to have a superuser who could do CHECKPOINT, >>> BACKUP and >>> whatever but could not see any user data? >> >> Not for backup. It'd be rather tricky to allow backing up data >> without >> being able to read it, afterall. >> >> I believe CHECKPOINT is protected since repeatedly calling it could >> result in performance problems, but you can probably get around >> that if >> needed by using a security-definer function. >> >> Why do you want non-superusers to be able to checkpoint, anyway? >> > > Basically I wonder if I can have a superuer that he has every > priviliges as > he does now (create language, rotate log files, create checkpoint and > everything superuser can do) but one thing I want to make sure is > that he > could not see any user data for security reason (just think my > database is > filled with very important UFO data ;-)). In another word, I need a > superuser be able to maintain database but he know nothing about > what in the > database. Is there a solution for this in PG? To be able to backup the database the user needs to be able to write it to a file. They can then read that file, and so read anything in the database. So... you're not going to be able to do this _at_all_ from within the database. You're going to need an external solution, probably a hideous seteuid thing, if you really want to do this. And it's a really bad idea, so you probably don't want to. Cheers, Steve
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: