Re: [HACKERS] binds only for s,u,i,d?

2006-07-05 Thread Neil Conway
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 06:55 -0400, Agent M wrote: > Like you said, it would make sense to have binds anywhere where there > are quoted strings- if only for anti-injection. There could be a "flat" > plan which simply did the string substitution with the proper escaping > at execute time. I don't

Re: [HACKERS] binds only for s,u,i,d?

2006-07-05 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Greg Stark wrote: Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 23:28 -0400, Agent M wrote: Why can't preparation be used as a global anti-injection facility? All that work would need to be deferred to EXECUTE-time, which would largely defeat the purpose of se

Re: [HACKERS] binds only for s,u,i,d?

2006-07-05 Thread Greg Stark
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 23:28 -0400, Agent M wrote: > > > Why can't preparation be used as a global anti-injection facility? > > All that work would need to be deferred to EXECUTE-time, which would largely > defeat the purpose of server-side prepared stat

Re: [HACKERS] binds only for s,u,i,d?

2006-07-05 Thread Neil Conway
On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 23:28 -0400, Agent M wrote: > Why are only select, insert, update, and delete supported for $X binds? This is a property of the way prepared statements are implemented. Prepared statement parameters can be used in the place of expressions in optimizeable statements (the actua