Hi, Alexey, On Apr 04, Alexey Botchkov wrote: > I still like my approach. > > > A plugin name is already known inside the plugin, > > the server should determine it automatically. > > Firstly I don't see any good way for the service to know the name of > the plugin that called the mysql_real_connect_local.
I don't see either. I can only think of something like #define plugin_name "spider" (for example), or const char * const plugin_name = "spider"; and #define mysql_real_connect_local(M) sql_service->mysql_real_connect_local_func(M, plugin_name) but it's not per plugin it's per *.so. If one .so would have many plugins, they'll all will have the same "plugin_name" and I have no solution for that. So it's a rather lousy solution, and I hoped you could come up with something better :) > Technically this call doesn't even have to be hard linked to a plugin. > Can be just done by a part of the server. The server doesn't have to use *plugin services*, services are an API for plugins to use. > Then why limit the plugin like this? That doesn't add much to the > security as the plugin can replace that string anyway. Not for security. It's to avoid boilerplate, to not force plugins to tell the server what the server already knows. > Also one plugin can have more than one connection and > I can imagine that different usernames for these connections make sence. well, the point was to identify what plugin makes the call. and almost always it will be a plugin name. > > current_user is the name of the user account and it's used in > > many places as such. Try, for example, to create a view or a stored > > procedure. Who will be a definer? > If not specified, the definer is going to be username@''. > And as a result the view or the procedure will be not functional. > But i think it's rather correct. The user of the SQL service has to specify > the definer explicitly. No, using pluginname@'' can hardly be correct. ''@'' is more reasonable. And it's not only definer, it's what CURRENT_USER shows, it's what privileges are used. Surely, not privileges of the pluginname@'' account, there is no such account. So CURRENT_USER should not be pluginname@''. > > Setting only user() might be ok. > I can agree with that. Setting the ctx->user only. > In this case the DEFINER of the view/procedure is going to be empty > if not explicitly specified. > Though don't see any advantage to what is now. USER() is purely informational. CURRENT_USER() is not, it has a clearly defined meaning, it's the name of the account that the privilege system uses. Regards, Sergei VP of MariaDB Server Engineering and secur...@mariadb.org _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
