-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/24/2015 06:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: >> On 08/23/2015 08:58 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: >>> I think that's a good thing to have, now I have concerns about >>> making this data readable for non-superusers. Cloud deployments >>> of Postgres are logically going to block the access of this >>> view. > >> I don't think it exposes any information of great security >> value. > > We just had that kerfuffle about whether WAL compression posed a > security risk; doesn't that imply that at least the data relevant > to WAL position has to be unreadable by non-superusers?
So pg_config might be fully unrestricted, but pg_controldata might need certain rows filtered based on superuser status? Do you think those rows should be present but redacted, or completely filtered out? Joe - -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJV2z3SAAoJEDfy90M199hlgmwP/iPI4gJAM00b1mWiPHYSEMjQ pdVgPkFgfGQKyTizo7rEv1nJTQI3J9aUD7hvqYvPGlSOum0xei17fiRUIKnfqGgZ 7aSuhc97gZ7U5LvDsClovEUDEon+RIibZAYHKnKv2qYDwO/ZvfdFFQNi9TV0eREi QrEYafNo3/PWqJtrJoqhXaXyXsZ33FKtaaesQZJXvUUkTaE42eviq0cPiz2lHEsq szlGBnPkBS3qthAusApetAobZH9OymL4yl1BWwmBl3d2nEvQ4OVFGWo195It4XyQ 98bMzXse0PvBuKkcKrlTjxPdtR9UE/2FHojh7VLaj+JQeCGjehXNuogGPr7XHNSu cbCvIWsxW7Vz1liwFxY9I7Aui6/4X/oPehrct4CqaihqoztP1JrkQpVJDBYWwAhH Q/sRe8gUY8AWQHQljt9nuZvXmEYBnFbSf8tWVZ3/yhU1fK9dcl9B5doIHwKQXXtW +BHx4mOX5gcSRvGQFkJO0auE3Y9dvfUtpV4xDC57OHekgKA+rZw/HtElwKIhgrHI QoCd9PpJdG3UngX7ffsRuhJIhTUCSOKA2AIdceRyH4UgtqtHLzSU1tom3XMcQD+f mJvlKMwSvqh2Qmd/ZiNhgN4APkGk1AmH26hMMhI9HIrAIghkmPDfssLxYcBgJyDd lt8dJLQDnaddFLuvdQww =KZVU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
