On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mark Dilger <hornschnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 28, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>>>> I don't see any precedent in the code for having a hardcoded role, other 
>>>> than
>>>> superuser, and allowing privileges based on a hardcoded test for membership
>>>> in that role.  I'm struggling to think of all the security implications of 
>>>> that.
>>> This would be the first.
>> Isn't pg_signal_backend an existing precedent?
> Sorry, I meant to say that there is no precedent for allowing access to data 
> based
> on a hardcoded test for membership in a role other than superuser.

This doesn't allow access to data, except through monitoring of
queries that are executed (e.g. full access to pg_stat_activity) -
which you can avoid by not using the role if that's your choice.

Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to