Re: Shared memory and FreeBSD's jail()

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: lister <lister(at)primetime(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Shared memory and FreeBSD's jail()
Date: 2005-05-19 15:42:13
Message-ID: 3884.1116517333@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

lister <lister(at)primetime(dot)com> writes:
> At the BSDCan tutorial last week on jails (and several other times)
> there was discussion regarding Postgres's use of system V style
> shared memory, and an unfortunate side effect of making jail() less
> secure. Specifically, to allow Postgres to operate in a jail()ed
> environment, the sysctl :
> jail.sysvipc_allowed=1
> has to be set. This allows ALL jails to access the memory, at the least
> leaving Postgres open to attack, at the worst allowing a door into who
> knows what security breach.

This claim is really pretty bogus, since there is still standard
file-permission-like security on the shared memory. Only if you give
usage of the postgres account to processes running in other jails is
there any risk.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew Hixson 2005-05-19 15:46:39 Re: 8.0.3 build error on Mac OS X 10.4
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2005-05-19 15:34:44 Re: unique index with bool