Re: [PATCH] remove is_member_of_role() from header, add can_set_role()
От | Mark Dilger |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] remove is_member_of_role() from header, add can_set_role() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | B96909D5-A0FB-45BA-B53A-38360886AA4A@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [PATCH] remove is_member_of_role() from header, add can_set_role() (Joshua Brindle <joshua.brindle@crunchydata.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] remove is_member_of_role() from header, add can_set_role()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On Oct 27, 2021, at 9:26 AM, Joshua Brindle <joshua.brindle@crunchydata.com> wrote: > > As a follow-on to Conflation of member/privs for predefined roles, > this removes is_member_of_role from the header to dissuade it's use > for privilege checking. Since SET ROLE must use membership rather than > privileges a new, explicitly named can_set_role() function is > exported. > > is_member_of_role_nosuper() still exists for the following purposes: > - membership loop checking in user.c > - membership matching for pg_hba.conf in hba.c > > Other uses of is_member_of_role_nosuper() should be avoided. > <0001-unexport-is_member_of_role-add-can_set_role.patch> I don't understand the purpose of this. You are defining can_set_role(member,role) as a simple wrapper around is_member_of_role(member,role). Couldn't the comment: + * + * Do not use this for privilege checking, instead use has_privs_of_role() be added to the header for is_member_of_role() without needing the new wrapper function? — Mark Dilger EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: