Re: object privilege granted to public a sox problem? (and others)

The whole point of ALL_TABLES is that it shows you all the tables that you have privileges to see. If you have been granted suitable privileges on a table in another schema then you have every right to see its definition. If you do not have privileges then it won't be listed. Taking away ALL_TABLES entirely makes no sense. 

Show the auditors the source code, I'm sure they'll understand ;)


-----Original message-----
From: Douglas Cowles
Date: 14/11/08 21:53
I appreciate everyone's responses to the extproc problem I had yesterday. I have a further question since many of you seem to know something about sox recommendations. I don't know whether the appdetective application is flagging just SOX recommendations or not but some of them seem quite daunting to implement and seem contrary to Oracle's own database philosophy. This isn't to say they're wrong I'm just looking for some advice.
For example.. it flags "Object privilege granted to public" - This flags over TWO thousand violations - everything from 
Execute on OWA_COOKIE to
select on ALL_TABLES, ALL_CONSTRAINTS.. standard vanilla stuff etc., I mean select on all_tables is a big security violation? I mean I guess so but how well are my patches and upgrades going to go if I revoke all 2000 object grants to public? I'd post the whole list but it would just be annoyingly long.
Is this a SOX requirement? Should this be risk accepted instead? In which case, does anyone have a good way to put that? Again, another one is "System privilege granted to public" 128 violations - this includes stuff like "CREATE PROCEDURE" granted to perfstat, or "EXECUTE ANY PROCEDURE" granted to OUTLN. I mean I guess I can see some of this but other stuff seems like I could be in a corner if I revoke it all.
Most of this stuff is Oracle standard - maybe the idea is it's too loose. Any thoughts? 


Doug Cowles

Other related posts: