Am Donnerstag, 21. Juli 2005 22:55 schrieb Tom Lane: > What this says is that when a role A is a member of another role B, A > automatically has all of B's privileges. But when a user U is a member > of role R, U does *not* have R's privileges automatically. What he has > is the right to do SET ROLE R, after which he has R's privileges in > addition to his own (see the rest of 4.31.4). > > This is ... um ... a pretty bizarre way of looking at security. > U can in fact do whatever his roles allow him to do, he just needs to > say "Mother may I?" first.
In some circles, this is considered the standard behavior of role security models. (There is a NIST standard somewhere.) It allows (with additional work) dynamic separation of concerns, namely that you could be a member of roles A and B but cannot use both at the same time. This is admittedly a fairly advanced feature, but should nevertheless be kept in mind. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq