Re: Restrict ALTER FUNCTION CALLED ON NULL INPUT (was Re: Not quite a security hole: CREATE LANGUAGE for non-superusers)

Excerpts from Kevin Grittner's message of mar jun 12 17:08:09 -0400 2012:
> >Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote: 
>  
> > If we had an independent way to have the function run as a
> > specific user, where that user DIDN'T own the function, I think
> > Kevin's use case would be satisfied.
>  
> I agree.  I'm not sure quite what that would look like, but maybe
> SECURITY ROLE <rolename> or some such could be an alternative to
> SECURITY INVOKER and SECURITY DEFINER.  (I haven't looked to see
> what the standard has here.)

We talked briefly about this a year ago:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgCon_2011_Developer_Meeting#Authorization_Issues
(Not quite the same thing, but it's closely related).

-- 
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support