[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2109?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12559092#action_12559092
 ] 

Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-2109:
----------------------------------------------

Thanks John, but is that wildcard value specific to Java 7? The only text I can 
find in J2SE 5 and JDK 6 is:
  - The principal field is optional in that, if it is omitted, it signifies 
"any principals".

Either way, it seems there are already mechanisms to specify all users, thus we 
don't want to introduce another way of specifying all users by having a quoted 
*.
Supporting PUBLIC as a DatabasePrincal name to represent all users could be a 
follow on change. It might make it clearer for folks used to SQL authorization.

> System privileges
> -----------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-2109
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2109
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: Security
>    Affects Versions: 10.3.1.4
>            Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>            Assignee: Martin Zaun
>         Attachments: DERBY-2109-02.diff, DERBY-2109-02.stat, 
> derby-2109-03-javadoc-see-tags.diff, DERBY-2109-04.diff, DERBY-2109-04.stat, 
> DERBY-2109-05and06.diff, DERBY-2109-05and06.stat, DERBY-2109-07.diff, 
> DERBY-2109-07.stat, DERBY-2109-08.diff, DERBY-2109-08.stat, 
> DERBY-2109-08_addendum.diff, DERBY-2109-08_addendum.stat, 
> SystemPrivilegesBehaviour.html, systemPrivs.html, systemPrivs.html, 
> systemPrivs.html, systemPrivs.html
>
>
> Add mechanisms for controlling system-level privileges in Derby. See the 
> related email discussion at 
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/33151.
> The 10.2 GRANT/REVOKE work was a big step forward in making Derby more  
> secure in a client/server configuration. I'd like to plug more client/server 
> security holes in 10.3. In particular, I'd like to focus on  authorization 
> issues which the ANSI spec doesn't address.
> Here are the important issues which came out of the email discussion.
> Missing privileges that are above the level of a single database:
> - Create Database
> - Shutdown all databases
> - Shutdown System
> Missing privileges specific to a particular database:
> - Shutdown that Database
> - Encrypt that database
> - Upgrade database
> - Create (in that Database) Java Plugins (currently  Functions/Procedures, 
> but someday Aggregates and VTIs)
> Note that 10.2 gave us GRANT/REVOKE control over the following  
> database-specific issues, via granting execute privilege to system  
> procedures:
> Jar Handling
> Backup Routines
> Admin Routines
> Import/Export
> Property Handling
> Check Table
> In addition, since 10.0, the privilege of connecting to a database has been 
> controlled by two properties (derby.database.fullAccessUsers and 
> derby.database.defaultConnectionMode) as described in the security section of 
> the Developer's Guide (see 
> http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/10.2/devguide/cdevcsecure865818.html).

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to