On 08/29/14 13:49, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 13:19:02 +0400, Alex Peshkoff <peshk...@mail.ru> > wrote: >> On 08/29/14 12:58, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: >>> 29.08.2014 10:47, Alex Peshkoff wrote: >>>> I'm afraid you did not understand what Carlos suggests - he only wants >>>> to be able to set source field to null like it was possible since fb1 >>>> times (sooner of all in interbase too). Certainly that's not a method > of >>>> protecting, but I see no ways how can it cause unexpected NULL result > in >>>> old app-s - such technique is in use for a long time. >>> You are right. But does it really worth returning of writable > system >>> tables or a >>> different solution exists?.. Encrypting of sources won't work. >> Why? If decrypt key is present only at developer's server - it's not bad >> solution. >> >>> Returning of NULL/exception >>> to anybody except owner/admins won't work. >> Definitely. >> >>> The only way I see - to implement ALTER >>> PROCEDURE ERASE SOURCES or something like that. >> This will work. > That sounds like an idea. An alternative would be to allow this when > creating or altering the procedure, eg something like CREATE PROCEDURE > myprocedure(...) RETURNS ... WITH (SUPPRESS_SOURCE) AS ...
Like Dimitriy correctly noticed - this will cause great problems when the moment will come to stop using BLR. And what should we do with such statement at that time? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
