Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[security] make csv/parquet engine work with dal #2730

Closed
sundy-li opened this issue Nov 10, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

[security] make csv/parquet engine work with dal #2730

sundy-li opened this issue Nov 10, 2021 · 5 comments
Assignees

Comments

@sundy-li
Copy link
Member

Summary

Now csv/parquet engine can only work with a local file. However, it allows users to read any file with permission in the query node.

This is dangerous, such as: /etc/passwd, /etc/sudoers.

We should make these engines work with dal.

@sundy-li sundy-li self-assigned this Nov 10, 2021
@BohuTANG
Copy link
Member

BohuTANG commented Nov 10, 2021

  1. For local file
    we should introduce a tmp_dir, all the files in this directory can be accessed.
    During reading:
    read('file_label_name') -- read from '/tmp_dir/file_label_name'

  2. For the cloud
    user puts their local file to a s3 storage bucket(perhaps give a http api to handle it), and using the COPY ... FROM S3(...) command to read.

Please see the references in this issue: #2627

@sundy-li
Copy link
Member Author

How about reuse the Config.Storage in query node, there is a config named data_path that can be used.

If we delopy as cloud-native serverless , the local file did not make sense.

@BohuTANG
Copy link
Member

How about reuse the Config.Storage in query node, there is a config named data_path that can be used.

If we delopy as cloud-native serverless , the local file did not make sense.

Looks great 💯

@Xuanwo
Copy link
Member

Xuanwo commented Dec 28, 2021

Any updates on this?

I'm working on the implementation of #3677, is there any thing I need to know?

@BohuTANG
Copy link
Member

Any updates on this?

We don't have plan for it in the future time, I think we should close it first.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants