Re: Addressing SECURITY DEFINER Function Vulnerabilities in PostgreSQL Extensions

Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>

From: Isaac Morland <isaac.morland@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
Cc: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2024-06-06T18:09:55Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 12:53, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:


> > I didn't get you completely here. w.r.t extensions how will this have
> > an impact if we set the search_path for definer functions.
>
> If we only set the search path for SECURITY DEFINER functions, I don't
> think that solves the whole problem.


Indeed. While the ability for a caller to set the search_path for a
security definer functions introduces security problems that are different
than for security invoker functions, it's still weird for the behaviour of
a function to depend on the caller's search_path. It’s even weirder for the
default search path behaviour to be different depending on whether or not
the function is security definer.