* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
> On 1/20/15 9:01 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
> >>>+1. In particular I'm very concerned with the idea of doing this via 
> >>>roles, because that would make it trivial for any superuser to disable 
> >>>auditing. The only good option I could see to provide this kind of 
> >>>flexibility would be allowing the user to provide a function that accepts 
> >>>role, object, etc and make return a boolean. The performance of that would 
> >>>presumably suck with anything but a C function, but we could provide some 
> >>>C functions to handle simple cases.
> >Superusers will be able to bypass, trivially, anything that's done in
> >the process space of PG.  The only possible exception to that being an
> >SELinux or similar solution, but I don't think that's what you were
> >getting at.
> 
> Not if the GUC was startup-only. That would allow someone with OS access to 
> the server to prevent a Postgres superuser from disabling it.

That is not accurate.

Being startup-only won't help if the user is a superuser.

> >I certainly don't think having the user provide a C function to specify
> >what should be audited as making any sense- if they can do that, they
> >can use the same hooks pgaudit is using and skip the middle-man.  As for
> >the performance concern you raise, I actually don't buy into it at all.
> >It's not like we worry about the performance of checking permissions on
> >objects in general and, for my part, I like to think that's because it's
> >pretty darn quick already.
> 
> I was only mentioning C because of performance concerns. If SQL or plpgsql is 
> fast enough then there's no need.

If this is being done for every execution of a query then I agree- SQL
or plpgsql probably wouldn't be fast enough.  That doesn't mean it makes
sense to have pgaudit support calling a C function, it simply means that
we need to find another way to configure auditing (which is what I think
I've done...).

        Thanks,

                Stephen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to