Re: Security options at different SQL-Databases with ODBC - who is best ?

In article <53ua04$jc@knot.queensu.ca>, guest <?@?.?> writes >In <53qrcr$8dk@nntp.idgonline.no> Nils.Myklebust@idg.no (Nils Myklebust) >wrote: >: Micorsoft seems to believe that free access by everyone to all data in >: all databases is the best situation for everyone. > > No comments. > >: There is *no* mechanism built into ODBC to protect any data from free >: manipulation by any user *if* that user has access to some application >: that can do such updates. Correct but this level of security should be handled by the database server. You can grant/revoke prvilieges to update/insert/delete/ select from each database table in turn for each user in turn. Also you can have database triggers/stored procedures which can perform security checks before allowing database modifications. > the frame of ODBC. But all of these are implemention issues(and > technically can/already easily be solved) not a problem of MS ODBC, > ANSI CLI, X/Open DBC or SQL in general. > > -g > > Most security issues have already been solved. Use OnLine/Secure a B1/B2 rated database server which also requires a B1/B2 rated operating system and ties it's security to that of the operating system. All security is handled on the server machine. -- David Williams