On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 13:36 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> However, I still maintain that views are the perfect security mechanism
> for system catalogs. Imagine that all the system catalogs were all
> views, and could be redefined or even dropped by the dba. They would
> present exactly the same stuff they do now, with rules presenting them
> just like the original table.
> Now, for extreme situations like that government server that requires
> catalog security, the dba can redefine the various rules for the catalog
> views and lock various things down, using whatever methodology he/she
> sees fit. This would not affect the internal workings of the server but
> would affect the client tools, which is really what I'm after.
Configurable security? Sounds great to me.
This is exactly how Teradata implements this; they even present you with
a choice of views to load ontop of the catalog tables. Secure/Not. You
choose.
...but in this case:
> ( A possible variant: the function body stays in prosrc,
> but
> > is encrypted.)
That sounds OK for this situation. Doesn't it Merlin?
That would open up the market for pay-for add-ons to PostgreSQL. It
would also encourage packaged app vendors to port their code to
PostgreSQL, in the knowledge that their source code would be secure.
[Dont jump on my case... not everybody thinks open source is cool enough
to actually do it themselves... and I accept their position]
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
