Horton
Menu

Re: Non-superuser subscription owners

Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
To: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-12-06T10:19:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 10:37 PM Mark Dilger
<mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 2, 2021, at 1:29 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If we want to maintain the property that subscriptions can only be
> > owned by superuser for your first version then isn't a simple check
> > like ((!superuser()) for each of the operations is sufficient?
>
> As things stand today, nothing prevents a superuser subscription owner from having superuser revoked.  The patch does nothing to change this.
>

I understand that but won't that get verified when we look up the
information in pg_authid as part of superuser() check?

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Fix possible crash in tablesync worker.

  2. Display 'password_required' option for \dRs+ command.

  3. Restart the apply worker if the 'password_required' option is changed.

  4. Fix possible logical replication crash.

  5. Add new predefined role pg_create_subscription.

  6. Expand AclMode to 64 bits

  7. More cleanup of a2ab9c06ea.

  8. Respect permissions within logical replication.

  9. Improve table locking behavior in the face of current DDL.