Re: Tom Lane 2016-02-22 <21507.1456099...@sss.pgh.pa.us> > Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes: > > Just to be clear, I'm not really against this patch as-is, but it > > shouldn't be a precedent or limit us from supporting more permissive > > permissions in other areas (or even here) if there are sensible > > use-cases for more permissive permissions. > > OK, and to be clear, I'm not against considering other use-cases and > trying to do something appropriate for them. I just reject the idea > that it's unnecessary or inappropriate for us to be concerned about > whether secret-holding files are secure.
I added the patch to the CF: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/9/532/ (I put it under "System administration" and not under "Security" because it concerns operation.) Christoph -- c...@df7cb.de | http://www.df7cb.de/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
