Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > It might be relevant for the whole discussion about inclusion of some form of > row level permissions, whatever based on, that there exist heaps of (in my > eyes conflicting) patents about row level permissions for relational > databases. I don't have any real clue about patent issues, but I fear that > makes inclusion into an open source product rather hard...
I'm not a lawyer, so we cannot decide whether it has patent issue or not until we get an adjudication in actually. However, I don't think these are conflicting the existing patent from the viewpoint of engineering. > Data security system and method - 5751949 - MCI Corp. - 1998 It said the row-level access controls are applied to force users to access tables via views. It does not conflicts our design. > Rule based database security system and method - 6820082 - Allegis > Corporation - 2004 It said the row-level access controls are applied based on query modifying. The legacy implementation of SE-PostgreSQL indeed modified WHERE clause of given queries to apply row-level access controls, but current one does not. > Row-level security in a relational database management system - 7240046 - IBM > - 2007 It said the row-level access controls are applied based on hierarcal relationship between subject and object, which is well known as Bell-La-PaDula security model. SE-PostgreSQL does not have any rules by itself, because it depends on an external security feature (SELinux). Database ACL is not a hierarcal security model obviously. > Database fine-grained access control - 7281003 - Oracle - 2007 It said the row-level access controls are applied based on query mofifying, like as the patent 6820082 doing. It does not conflicts to SE-PostgreSQL. Thanks, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
