Re: leaky views, yet again

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: leaky views, yet again
Date: 2010-10-05 18:08:15
Message-ID: AANLkTinDK4DfFGKHmyPBrR48+u2FTRKdwyx0VGcdGVuj@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Well, the only thing I've ever wanted to do this for was to allow
> sales reps to see their own customers but not the customers of other
> sales reps (because if they could pull our complete customer list,
> then once they left and went to work for $COMPETITOR they'd start
> trying to pick off our customers; of course, we couldn't prevent them
> from maintaining a list of their own customers, and no doubt they knew
> who some of the other customers were, but they couldn't just dump out
> the complete list from the database).  I agree it's hopeless to
> prevent all side-channel leaks, but I'd describe the goal like this:
>
> Prevent access to the actual tuple contents of the hidden rows.

Though I find it unlikely the sales people would have direct access to
run arbitrary SQL -- let alone create custom functions.

If the users that have select access on the view don't have DDL access
doesn't that make them leak-proof for those users?

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2010-10-05 18:15:20 Re: leaky views, yet again
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-10-05 18:01:25 Re: leaky views, yet again