> On Nov 9, 2021, at 8:22 AM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote:
>
> In terms of least-surprise, I do tend to think that the answer is "only
> care about what is explicitly put into the command"- that is, if it
> isn't in the CREATE ROLE statement then it gets left as-is. Not sure
> how others feel about that though.
bob: CREATE ROLE charlie;
bob: GRANT charlie TO david;
super_alice: CREATE OR REPLACE ROLE charlie SUPERUSER;
I think this is the sort of thing Tom and I are worried about. "david" is now
a member of a superuser role, and it is far from clear that "super_alice"
intended that. Even if "bob" is not malicious, having this happen by accident
is pretty bad.
If we fix the existing bug that the pg_auth_members.grantor field can end up as
a dangling reference, instead making sure that it is always accurate, then
perhaps this would be ok if all roles granted into "charlie" had
grantor="super_alice". I'm not sure that is really good enough, but it is a
lot closer to making this safe than allowing the command to succeed when role
"charlie" has been granted away by someone else.
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
