I'm trying to give an entire database access to a user, but remove access for a specific table or a specific schema that has confidential data, but it's just not working out, tried multiple - grant and revoke statements but in vain.
This is what I've tested so far.
Initially, I had this role for the user
GRANT ALL ON DATABASE raw TO ROLE transformer;
checked the grants and removed that
SHOW GRANTS TO ROLE transformer;
revoke select on all tables in schema raw.<secret_schema> from role transformer;
revoke all on DATABASE raw from ROLE transformer;
Started giving access to individual schemas/tables, but the "grant usage on database" just gives every schema/table access to the user
grant usage on database raw to role transformer ; -- usage gives all tables access
grant usage on schema raw.<open_schema> to role transformer ;
grant all on schema raw.<open_schema> to role transformer ;
grant select on all tables raw.<open_schema> to role transformer ;
Lastly, tried these revoke too, but in vain
revoke select on table raw.<secret_schema>.s from ROLE transformer;
revoke usage on schema raw.<secret_schema> from role transformer;
For more information, this access is for a DBT user and an analyst user, who can hit/select/read the raw database , but just 1 schema/table should not be accessible, rest all should be with a "future tables" clause.
Design deep-dive: https://blog.getdbt.com/how-we-configure-snowflake/
As Greg, already mentioned (and demonstrated), "GRANT ALL ON DATABASE raw TO ROLE x" does not grant permission to access the objects in the database. It grants permission to modify the database object (in your case, it's not needed and I would suggest you not grant it according to the "Principle of least privilege").
https://docs.snowflake.com/en/user-guide/security-access-control-privileges.html#database-privileges
I think, the confusing thing is, "revoke from" command does not return any error if you try to revoke permission that was not granted:
create role r2;
revoke all on database gokhan_db from role r2;
So your revoke commands do not fail, but in fact, they do not revoke anything, as this permission were assigned to the role public:
revoke select on table raw.<secret_schema>.s from ROLE transformer;
revoke usage on schema raw.<secret_schema> from role transformer;
Could you check the permissions of the role public, again?
show grants to role public;
grant usage on database raw to role transformer ; -- usage gives all
tables access
This is not what's granting access to the tables; something else is. You can confirm that running a simple script like this one:
use role securityadmin;
create role new_role_1;
grant role new_role_1 to user my_user;
use role sysadmin;
grant usage on database test to role new_role_1;
use role new_role_1;
select * from test.public.foo; --SQL compilation error: Object 'TEST.PUBLIC.FOO' does not exist or not authorized.
use role sysadmin;
select * from test.public.foo; -- Works
Roles inherit from other roles. All roles inherit from the PUBLIC role by default. Could someone have granted the PUBLIC roles the privileges that this role is inheriting? Does it inherit from a role that has more permissions than PUBLIC?
Related
I can't grant a new role on all tables. A table denies the query. How can I grant the user to be able run this command?
CREATE ROLE userrole123 WITH LOGIN PASSWORD 'userrole123' VALID UNTIL '2024-01-07 09:37:39.0' INHERIT;
GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA public TO userrole123;
Output
SQL Error [42501]: ERROR: permission denied for table test
I run this command GRANT USAGE ON SCHEMA public to myusername but it did not solve it.
Thanks
The documentation is pretty outspoken there:
Ordinarily, only the object's owner (or a superuser) can grant or revoke privileges on an object. However, it is possible to grant a privilege “with grant option”, which gives the recipient the right to grant it in turn to others.
So obviously the user who is running the GRANT is neither a superuser, nor does it own test, nor has it been granted the SELECT privilege WITH GRANT OPTION.
I would like to create "read-only privileges" in a PostgreSQL database (including the restriction of creating or dropping tables).
My strategy is to create a group with these privileges and then add roles that have had all their privileges revoked. In that way, the only inherit privileges when part of the read-only group.
I used the following commands to create privileges but it seems roles can add, delete tables when they join the group:
role_test_db=# REVOKE ALL ON DATABASE role_test_db FROM select_access_group;
REVOKE
role_test_db=# GRANT CONNECT ON DATABASE role_test_db TO select_access_group;
GRANT
role_test_db=# GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA public TO select_access_group;
GRANT
I was reading the documentation and it seems like creating tables would be under CREATE privilege but I have not granted this. Can some explain why users part of this group can still make tables?
There are several mistakes:
Revoking privileges on the database does not restrict user's rights to create objects. For that, you have to revoke privileges on the schemas.
You can only REVOKE privileges that were GRANTed (by default or explicitly). I doubt that select_access_group has ever been granted any privileges on the database.
You likely forgot to revoke the dangerous default CREATE privilege on schema public. Connect as superuser and run
REVOKE CREATE ON SCHEMA public FROM PUBLIC;
A user can only revoke privileges that were granted directly by that user
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/13/sql-revoke.html
See privileges
\du
select * from pg_roles;
Change (base) prilileges under admin role (postgres)
On google cloud, with "postgres" user (which is not superuser), i do:
CREATE ROLE postgres_subuser1 LOGIN PASSWORD 'some_pass';
CREATE ROLE postgres_subuser2 LOGIN PASSWORD 'some_pass';
GRANT postgres TO postgres_subuser1;
GRANT postgres TO postgres_subuser2;
Above part wroks, though then I try to set users access on each other objects:
ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE postgres_subuser1 GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON TABLES TO postgres_subuser2;
ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES FOR ROLE postgres_subuser2 GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON TABLES TO postgres_subuser1;
gives: must be member of role "postgres_subuser1"
How can solve that?
BTW, if try same on local instance, it works without any error, but this error raises on google cloud.
You need to explicitly grant the postgres user the role. Eg:
GRANT postgres_subuser1 TO postgres;
We have an existing postgres database in production with a superuser adm that is being used to do everything. Our web application connects to the database using the same user and also the administrators(for patching/updating etc.) use the same credentials.
We have to fix this to have roles so that we can have read-write, readonly and admin roles.
We don't want our web application and admin to connect to the database as superuser.
With that being said, I have created the following sql script to make the appropriate roles.
I am not a database expert(not yet) so wanted to know the issues or better ways to solve this.
ALTER ROLE adm NOLOGIN;
CREATE role user_role NOINHERIT;
CREATE role readonlyuser_role NOINHERIT;
CREATE role admin_role CREATEDB CREATEROLE NOINHERIT;
CREATE ROLE u_service LOGIN PASSWORD '<some password>' INHERIT;
CREATE ROLE u_admin LOGIN PASSWORD '<some password>' INHERIT;
CREATE ROLE u_reader LOGIN PASSWORD '<some password>' INHERIT;
GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA public TO readonlyuser_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON SCHEMA public TO admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA public TO user_role, admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL FUNCTIONS IN SCHEMA public TO user_role, admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL SEQUENCES IN SCHEMA public TO user_role, admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL PROCEDURES IN SCHEMA public TO user_role, admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL ROUTINES IN SCHEMA public TO user_role, admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON SCHEMA audit TO admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA audit TO admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL FUNCTIONS IN SCHEMA audit TO admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL SEQUENCES IN SCHEMA audit TO admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL PROCEDURES IN SCHEMA audit TO admin_role;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL ROUTINES IN SCHEMA audit TO admin_role;
GRANT admin_role TO u_admin;
GRANT user_role TO u_service;
GRANT readonlyuser_role TO u_reader;
A few things to consider.
Spell out what user_role and readonlyuser_role can do
Start by revoking all privileges from both these roles, then add them back only as needed. This makes it both clearer in your intentions about what the roles should do, and safer in practice because higher privileges than intended won't accidentally sneak in.
REVOKE ALL ON SCHEMA public FROM public; --only authorized roles can do anything here.
REVOKE ALL ON SCHEMA public FROM user_role;
REVOKE ALL ON SCHEMA public FROM readonlyuser_role;
GRANT ...
The Database Owner is a local Superuser
We usually make the db owner an additional role; one who only logs in to create or alter the schema, then gracefully exits. If your admin_role does more than this, consider adding an owner_role.
Does a public role need to connect?
Consider adding
REVOKE CONNECT ON DATABASE yourdb FROM public;
This blocks the loophole where any role created on the same DB server could log into this database.
Do all this in a transaction block
Stopping privilege assignment half-way through the job can lead to all sorts of trouble, much akin to locking your keys in your car. Make the privilege assignments a single transaction where possible, so a missed semicolon doesn't lock you out.
I need to restrict a user, access only on a particualr schema tables only.So I tried following query and login as user1_gmail_com. But I got following error when I try to browse any schema table.
My Query:
SELECT clone_schema('my_application_template_schema','user1_gmail_com');
CREATE USER user1_gmail_com WITH PASSWORD 'myloginpassword';
REVOKE ALL ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA user1_gmail_com FROM PUBLIC;
GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA user1_gmail_com TO user1_gmail_com;
SQL error:
ERROR: permission denied for schema user1_gmail_com at character 46
In statement:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS total FROM (SELECT * FROM "user1_gmail_com"."organisations_table") AS sub
Updated Working Query:
SELECT clone_schema('my_application_template_schema','user1_gmail_com');
CREATE USER user1_gmail_com WITH PASSWORD 'myloginpassword';
REVOKE ALL ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA user1_gmail_com FROM PUBLIC;
GRANT USAGE ON SCHEMA user1_gmail_com TO user1_gmail_com;
GRANT SELECT ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA user1_gmail_com TO user1_gmail_com;
You need to grant access not only to the tables in the schema, but also to the schema itself.
From the manual:
By default, users cannot access any objects in schemas they do not own. To allow that, the owner of the schema must grant the USAGE privilege on the schema.
So either make your created user the owner of the schema, or grant USAGE on the schema to this user.
This confused me. Still not sure I'm handling it correctly. Run \h grant for the syntax within psql. Here is how I managed to get my other users and groups to work as I needed:
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON SCHEMA foo TO GROUP bar;
GRANT ALL PRIVILEGES ON ALL TABLES IN SCHEMA foo TO GROUP bar;
I kept getting this error when using flyway to deploy database changes. I do some manual setup first, such as creating the database, so flyway wouldn't need those super-admin permissions.
My Fix
I had to ensure that the database user that flyway job used had ownership rights to the public schema, so that the flyway user could then assign the right to use the schema to other roles.
Additional setup Details
I am using AWS RDS (both regular and Aurora), and they don't allow super users in the databases. RDS reserves super users for use by AWS, only, so that consumers are unable to break the replication stuff that is built in. However, there's a catch-22 that you must be an owner in postgres to be able to modify it.
My solution was to create a role that acts as the owner ('owner role'), and then assign both my admin user and the flyway user to the owner role, and use ALTER scripts for each object to assign the object's owner to the owner role.
I missed the public schema, since that was auto-created when I created the database script manually. The public schema defaulted to my admin role rather than the shared owner role. So when the flyway user tried to assign public schema permissions to other roles, it didn't have the authority to do that. An error was not thrown during flyway execution, however.