2011/1/19 KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com>: >> And how about adding a >> ProcessUtility_hook to trap evil non-DML statements that some >> nefarious user might issues? >> > It seems to me reasonable as long as the number of controlled command > are limited. For example, LOAD command may be a candidate being > controlled without exceptions. > However, it will be a tough work, if the plug-in tries to parse and > analyze supplied utility commands by itself.
I think the key is to either accept or reject the command based on very simple criteria - decide based only on the command type, and ignore its parameters. > I uploaded my draft here. > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/SEPostgreSQL_Documentation > > If reasonable, I'll move them into *.sgml style. I have yet to review that, but will try to get to it before too much more time goes by. > I may want to simplify the step to installation using an installer > script. OK, but let's get this nailed down as soon as possible. Tempus fugit. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
