(2010/06/08 9:46), Tom Lane wrote: > KaiGai Kohei<kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> writes: >> In this case, is it unnecessary to expose the given argument in >> the error message (from security perspective), isn't it? > > Yes, if all you care about is security and not usability, that looks > like a great solution. We're *not* doing it. > Sorry, are you saying we should not revise error messages because of usability??
If so, and if we decide the middle-threat also should be fixed, it is necessary to distinguish functions trusted and untrusted, even if a function is built-in. Perhaps, pg_proc takes a new flag to represent it. Thanks, -- KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
