Horton

Re: Granting SET and ALTER SYSTE privileges for GUCs

David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>, Joshua Brindle <joshua.brindle@crunchydata.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Joe Conway <joe@crunchydata.com>
Date: 2022-03-30T15:51:05Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 8:46 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> I don't want to do that with
> a blunderbuss, but perhaps there's an argument to do it for specific
> cases (search_path comes to mind, though the performance cost could be
> significant, since I think setting that in function SET clauses is
> common).
>


I suspect it became considerably moreso when we fixed the search_path CVE
since we basically told people that doing so, despite the possible
performance hit, was the easiest solution to their immediate dump/restore
failures.  But ISTM that because that SET has a function invocation context
it could bypass any such check.  Though maybe the DO command exposes a flaw
in that idea.
David J.

Commits

  1. Allow granting SET and ALTER SYSTEM privileges on GUC parameters.