(2010/06/15 12:47), KaiGai Kohei wrote: > (2010/06/15 12:28), Tom Lane wrote: >> KaiGai Kohei<kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> writes: >>>>>> The attached patch tries to add one more security hook on the >>>>>> initialization of PostgreSQL instance (InitPostgres()). >> >>>> Yeah, but so what? Stephen's point is still valid. >> >>> On the hook, I'd like to obtain security context of the client process >>> which connected to the PostgreSQL instance. It is not available at the >>> _PG_init() phase, because clients don't connect yet. >> >> InitPostgres is called by a number of process types that don't *have* >> clients. I concur with the other opinions that this hook is badly >> thought out. >> > I intended to skip it when InitPostgres() is called without clients. > > For example, the hook might be better to put on PerformAuthentication() > for more clarification of the purpose. >
In the attached patch, the security hook was moved to ClientAuthentication() from InitPostgres(), for more clarification of the purpose. What I want to do is to assign additional properties to identify the client (such as security label) for each authenticated session. Its purpose is similar to "session" module of PAM in operating system. It allows to assign additional session properties more than user-id. Thanks, -- KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com>
pgsql-v9.1-add-auth-hook.2.patch
Description: application/octect-stream
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
