Greg, all,

I will reply to the emails in detail when I get a chance but am out of town
at a funeral, so it'll likely be delayed. I did want to echo my agreement
for the most part with Greg and in particular...

On Thursday, June 12, 2014, Gregory Smith <> wrote:

> On 6/11/14, 10:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Now, as soon as we introduce the concept that selecting from a table
>> might not really mean "read from the table" but "read from the table after
>> applying this owner-specified qual", we're opening up a whole new set of
>> attack surfaces. Every pg_dump is an opportunity to hack somebody else's
>> account, or at least audit their activity.
> I'm in full agreement we should clearly communicate the issues around
> pg_dump in particular, because they can't necessarily be eliminated
> altogether without some major work that's going to take a while to finish.
>  And if the work-around is some sort of GUC for killing RLS altogether,
> that's ugly but not unacceptable to me as a short-term fix.

A GUC which is enable / disable / error-instead may work quiet well, with
error-instead for pg_dump default if people really want it (there would
have to be a way to disable that though, imv).

Note that enable is default in general, disable would be for superuser only
(or on start-up) to disable everything, and error-instead anyone could use
but it would error instead of implementing RLS when querying an RLS-enabled

This approach was suggested by an existing user testing out this RLS
approach, to be fair, but it looks pretty sane to me as a way to address
some of these concerns. Certainly open to other ideas and thoughts though.



Reply via email to