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

That's pretty rich. Sorry, you have to restrict ALL_TABLES. Yeah, uh-huh. Also, you have to disable root. And take away the dba group. Not going to happen.  

If you're having problems with your audit, here's my suggestion: tell the auditors that, in Unix, an audit flag is thrown on files which are 777 or 4777 because anyone can change the contents of a file. This is equivalent to having universal write privileges on tables. However, 744 is a perfectly reasonable privilege level, because anyone can read the contents of a file, but only the owner can *change* said contents. In the same way, *some* underlying Oracle dictionary objects allow for universal read, but not universal write. Applying the same principles that allow your computer system to go on functioning normally, the database should pass its audit.  

HTH, Bambi.  

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Douglas Cowles <dcowles_at_us.ibm.com> wrote:

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

-- 
Andrew W. Kerber

'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l