On Feb 14, 2012, at 19:35 , Randall Leeds wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:19, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Feb 14, 2012, at 19:13 , Randall Leeds wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 04:14, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Devs, >>>> >>>> Please outline: >>>> >>>> - What has been changed since round one of the 1.2.0 release >>>> - What remains to be fixed for regression purposes >>>> - Who is doing these fixes, and when will they be done by >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> N >>> >>> I'd like to know if it was always the case that design doc actions on >>> system dbs were inaccessible to non-admins or if that's just since the >>> recent security changes. If it's recent, why was that part deemed >>> necessary and can we remove it? >> >> It is part of the recent changes and the reason is that a view potentially >> leaks information about docs and we don't want that. I'm happy to relax this >> later if we can convince people to write views that don't compromise their >> security, but until then I opted for the more secure default. >> > > I motion to remove this restriction now, unless there are actions on > the system dbs, installed by default, that leak anything at all. > I see the motivation but I feel it might be overly paranoid. Only an > admin can modify the ddocs. If a user decides to add views to > _replicator or _user they had best think about what they expose and to > whom. > > If there's no objection I can try to tackle this in the evening.
I object :)
