|
However it takes
only that one person using either a special profile or a special tool
that gives the developer or implementor all-access to /fix something/,
or an accidental equivalent granting of rights to a user due to error(s)
in security implementation, for the expected access method to beThis is a bit of a red herring, because if you can bypass authority then
bypassed on the production system; such a bypass need not even be
malicious.
FWiW I also prefer that the owner of the database to be a peon user,Agreed. The owner of the database ought have no authority except to the
so that any program adopting the authority of that owning user, for the
purpose of accessing the database, does not also obtain access to
anything beyond what the active user for the job is already authorized.
Actually I somehow managed to type "writes" twice instead of "rights".Now, if you absolutely must,
you can grant read <ed: "access" inferred vs "writes"> writes
so people can do external queries. That's up to you. But there is
simply no reason to have unfettered update writes to your database.
If you've created a perfectly good database access mediator such as
the I/O module mentioned, then by all means lock the database down -
you will have shut the door on a lot of gremlins.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.