On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 2:14 PM Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, it's probably better to say "to alter roles with %s" to refer to
> roles that presently have the attribute and "to change the %s attribute"
> when referring to privileges for the attribute. I did this in v2, too.
>
> I've also switched from errhint() to errdetail() as suggested by Tom.
This seems fine to me in general but I'm not entirely sure about this part:
@@ -758,16 +776,13 @@ AlterRole(ParseState *pstate, AlterRoleStmt *stmt)
{
/* things an unprivileged user certainly can't do */
if (dinherit || dcreaterole || dcreatedb || dcanlogin || dconnlimit ||
- dvalidUntil || disreplication || dbypassRLS)
+ dvalidUntil || disreplication || dbypassRLS ||
+ (dpassword && roleid != currentUserId))
ereport(ERROR,
(errcode(ERRCODE_INSUFFICIENT_PRIVILEGE),
- errmsg("permission denied")));
-
- /* an unprivileged user can change their own password */
- if (dpassword && roleid != currentUserId)
- ereport(ERROR,
- (errcode(ERRCODE_INSUFFICIENT_PRIVILEGE),
- errmsg("must have CREATEROLE privilege to change another user's password")));
+ errmsg("permission denied to alter role"),
+ errdetail("You must have %s privilege and %s on role \"%s\".",
+ "CREATEROLE", "ADMIN OPTION", rolename)));
}
else if (!superuser())
{
Basically my question is whether having one error message for all of
those cases is good enough, or whether we should be trying harder. I
don't mind if the conclusion is that it's OK as-is, and I'm not
entirely sure what would be better. But when I was working on this
code, all of those cases OR'd together feeding into a single error
message seemed a little sketchy to me, so I am wondering what others
think.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
