Horton
Menu

Re: Non-superuser subscription owners

Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>

View thread
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-11-17T17:33:24Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Wed, 2021-11-17 at 07:44 -0800, Mark Dilger wrote:
> Administrators may quite
> intentionally create low-power users, ones without access to anything
> but a single table, or a single schema, as a means of restricting the
> damage that a subscription might do (or more precisely, what the
> publisher might do via the subscription.)  It would be surprising if
> that low-power user was then able to recreate the subscription into
> something different.

I am still trying to understand this use case. It doesn't feel like
"ownership" to me, it feels more like some kind of delegation.

Is GRANT a better fit here? That would allow more than one user to
REFRESH, or ENABLE/DISABLE the same subscription. It wouldn't allow
RENAME, but I don't see why we'd separate privileges for
CREATE/DROP/RENAME anyway.

This would not address the weirdness of the existing code where a
superuser loses their superuser privileges but still owns a
subscription. But perhaps we can solve that a different way, like just
performing a check when someone loses their superuser privileges that
they don't own any subscriptions.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis

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.