Re: Installing PostgreSQL as "postgress" versus "root" Debate!
От | list-pgsql-admin@news.cistron.nl ("Miquel van Smoorenburg" ) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Installing PostgreSQL as "postgress" versus "root" Debate! |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ctggdm$en0$2@news.cistron.nl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Installing PostgreSQL as "postgress" versus "root" Debate! ("Goulet, Dick" <DGoulet@vicr.com>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
In article <4001DEAF7DF9BD498B58B45051FBEA650207ABAA@25exch1.vicorpower.vicr.com>, Goulet, Dick <DGoulet@vicr.com> wrote: > Well, someone I can wholeheartedly agree with. So it really does not >matter who owns the binaries. Once the right account gets hacked your >had. If they hack root your dead, if they hack postgres the database is >had although the server may survive. In either case the state of your >backups is your saving grace or doom. No, it's easier to hack postgres, as the database is running as the postgres user. If you allow something like PgPerl, it's even trivial. The PgPerl script runs as user postgres, and can trojan e.g. the psql executable. The next time someone (perhaps even root ... ) runs psql, they're 0wned. Now it's not that bad an idea to install postgres as a non-root user .. but use a DIFFERENT account to actually start and run postgres. That way your binaries are protected. E.g. install postgres as user 'pgbin', so that all binaries are owned by 'pgbin', then run it as user 'postgres'. Mike.
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: