On 2005-05-13, Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: >><plug>Doesn't it seem like a really complete set of system views (based on >>information_schema or otherwise) would potentially allow securing the >>pg_catalog?</plug> > > Not really, no. It would just be one more thing that my hardening script > had to remove permissions from.
It is specifically intended that you should not have to do that. The precise qualification rules are not yet firmly defined, but if a non-superuser can see anything in the views that does not relate to a permission that was actually granted to them, then it is a bug. (Areas which I expect to need some fine-tuning are: the schema contents view, the rules and triggers views, and possibly some of the constraint info.) > I still have an open mind about the sysviews project, but the more > oversold, hyped and promoted with bogus arguments it gets the more > skeptical I become. I have to say that I find the arguments _against_ it just as bogus. Most significantly, there is a lot of comment on what people _think_ we could do (or not do), and no comment about what we actually _did_. I strongly suggest to anyone thinking of commenting on them that you actually install them and look at them first - while the project is as yet unfinished, and there is a lack of documentation and plenty of rough edges (and quite likely some bugs too), it does actually work and a number of people (some of whom have commented in this thread) have already found it useful. Grab a copy of it from pgfoundry's CVS, go into the sql/ directory and run ./build.sh yourdatabasename (as a superuser, you can add options like -U if needed - the options to build.sh are just passed on to psql). -- Andrew, Supernews http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
