couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Issues blocking the 1.2.0 release
Date Tue, 14 Feb 2012 18:41:24 GMT

On Feb 14, 2012, at 19:35 , Randall Leeds wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:19, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On Feb 14, 2012, at 19:13 , Randall Leeds wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 04:14, Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>>>> Devs,
>>>> 
>>>> Please outline:
>>>> 
>>>>   - What has been changed since round one of the 1.2.0 release
>>>>   - What remains to be fixed for regression purposes
>>>>   - Who is doing these fixes, and when will they be done by
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> N
>>> 
>>> I'd like to know if it was always the case that design doc actions on
>>> system dbs were inaccessible to non-admins or if that's just since the
>>> recent security changes. If it's recent, why was that part deemed
>>> necessary and can we remove it?
>> 
>> It is part of the recent changes and the reason is that a view potentially
>> leaks information about docs and we don't want that. I'm happy to relax this
>> later if we can convince people to write views that don't compromise their
>> security, but until then I opted for the more secure default.
>> 
> 
> I motion to remove this restriction now, unless there are actions on
> the system dbs, installed by default, that leak anything at all.
> I see the motivation but I feel it might be overly paranoid. Only an
> admin can modify the ddocs. If a user decides to add views to
> _replicator or _user they had best think about what they expose and to
> whom.
> 
> If there's no objection I can try to tackle this in the evening.

I object :)



Mime
View raw message