Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

postgresql.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#91

Post by gingerlime »

brokenparser wrote: post #89
gingerlime wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks Craig. I might do that, but I think we're too small fish for any kind of a bespoke solution. Given that you guys came up with WAL-E, I was secretly hoping this was somehow baked-into some magical heroku interface already...

I'm just glad the "I want magical stuff for free" kind of customer isn't restricted to any particular service or product.

I didn't say I want it for free. I'm just not a big-enough customer with deep enough pockets to have some customized solution built especially for me by heroku.

It doesn't mean that other people like me wouldn't be interested in something like this if it existed.

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#92

Post by achillean »

jonknee wrote: post #83
ceejayoz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you have to have a database starting with - for the bug to work.

No, but thankfully you do need postgres to be accessible remotely.

Which is not an uncommon situation actually. I've only started surveying the Internet for PostgreSQL for a bit more than a day and I've already discovered more than a hundred thousand (168,031) remotely-accessible PostgreSQL instances: http://www.shodanhq.com/search?q=port%3A5432

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#94

Post by krg »

achillean wrote: post #92
jonknee wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but thankfully you do need postgres to be accessible remotely.

Which is not an uncommon situation actually. I've only started surveying the Internet for PostgreSQL for a bit more than a day and I've already discovered more than a hundred thousand (168,031) remotely-accessible PostgreSQL instances: http://www.shodanhq.com/search?q=port%3A5432

I'm surprised this is so common. I've never set up any database accessible to the public-- I've already got to worry about securing the public-facing web server, why add another vector for attack?

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#95

Post by craigkerstiens »

gingerlime wrote: post #81
craigkerstiens wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Product manager of Heroku Postgres here; if you specifically need this functionality around point in time restores you should reach out to us. Would love to hear more around the use cases behind it.

Thanks Craig. I might do that, but I think we're too small fish for any kind of a bespoke solution. Given that you guys came up with WAL-E, I was secretly hoping this was somehow baked-into some magical heroku interface already...

Make sure to reach out, magic may already exist.

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#96

Post by syncsynchalt »

jonknee wrote: post #83
ceejayoz wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you have to have a database starting with - for the bug to work.

No, but thankfully you do need postgres to be accessible remotely.

Or you'll need such a weird design that user input is translated to database names.

I suspect that's why they weren't able to tell people that if your db port is secure you're safe.

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#97

Post by jonknee »

rosser wrote: post #93
jonknee wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but thankfully you do need postgres to be accessible remotely.

Or have a Bad Guy in your network...

I firewall all traffic so not only is psql not open remotely (the users are tied to hosts), but the traffic never even makes it there unless you are coming from an authorized machine. It would take a really bad guy on the network to cause trouble here and at that point the database is not my biggest concern.

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#98

Post by selenamarie »

krg wrote: post #94
achillean wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is not an uncommon situation actually. I've only started surveying the Internet for PostgreSQL for a bit more than a day and I've already discovered more than a hundred thousand (168,031) remotely-accessible PostgreSQL instances: http://www.shodanhq.com/search?q=port%3A5432

I'm surprised this is so common. I've never set up any database accessible to the public-- I've already got to worry about securing the public-facing web server, why add another vector for attack?

In one case, a large service provider is specifically providing that kind of database access to their customers.

And to be fair: http://www.shodanhq.com/search?q=mysql

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#99

Post by achillean »

selenamarie wrote: post #98
krg wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised this is so common. I've never set up any database accessible to the public-- I've already got to worry about securing the public-facing web server, why add another vector for attack?

In one case, a large service provider is specifically providing that kind of database access to their customers. And to be fair: http://www.shodanhq.com/search?q=mysql

You get a lot more results if you search for the service/ port directly! http://www.shodanhq.com/search?q=port%3A3306

Re: PostgreSQL 9.2.4, 9.1.9, 9.0.13 and 8.4.17 released

#100

Post by vacri »

16s wrote: post #23
[deleted] wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Debian has it. I assume Ubuntu does as well... at least for the 8.4 version. --- PostgreSQL 8.4.17 on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc-4.4.real (Debian 4.4.5-8) 4.4.5, 64-bit

We have two Ubuntu 11.10 servers (decommissioning soon!) that previously contained 9.1.3 and have just had this 9.1.9 version updated from the repos.
Post reply on HN