Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 01:56:47PM +0200, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
A user that is trusted with installing a C-function in the backend is free to scan the process memory anyway so in what way did that increase the security? IMHO, the only relevant security in that context is to have trusted people install trusted modules. I'm surprised that something like that made you remove significant functionality.

You're missing the point. The type output function is not generally a
priveledged function. Think bpcharout, text_out, numeric_out, etc...
These can be called by users directly and the input to those functions
cannot be trusted.

Ah, OK that makes sense. An alternative solution when the signature was changed could perhaps have been to pass one single argument, a structure appointing the data and its associated type. My idea would work if the data and its type lived together always from the moment its instantiated (read from disk or otherwise) and until death do them apart (or the data is stored on disk, in which case the tupledesc knows what it is). I guess that would imply a major rewrite and that my desire to have a RAW fixed length type isn't enough motivation to do that :-)

Instead, I would like to humbly request the inclusion of a UUID datatype (or an opaque 128 bit datatype) in the core package. It's increasingly common and some databases (MS SQLServer) already have built in support for it.

Thomas Hallgren

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to