Security Implications of using DBMS_JOB

Hello there,

I'm currently working for a company developing applications for a seperate live site, who do not run batch jobs within the database because they see it as a "Security Risk".

I've recently completed some work that I personally believe would be better off being run via the DBMS_JOB package rather than an OS batch job. I have never encountered this "Security Risk" argument before.

Their argument is that the DBA's on the live system often connect using OS-authenticated logons. The argument goes that if a hacker managed to penetrate the network, they would be able to connect to the database directly as they'd already be authenticated on the network.

Now this to me sounds like a huge security risk, so if they are prepared to do this, I can't understand what they have against running DBMS_JOB. Their argument against it is that once the hacker is on the database, they could then set up 'trojan horse' style batch jobs to run.

Now, my argument against this is:

1. If they reach the database, they could do a lot of damage anyway, and what is to stop them using DBMS_JOB as things currently stand? They can only execute it under the privs of the user they connect as. If this is the SYS user, then why are we allowing automatic authentication anyway?!
2. When the DBA's can routinely monitor which jobs are running via the DBA_JOBS dictionary view, they could easily see if somebody has created an erroneous job.
3. What is to currently stop somebody creating a 'trojan horse' batch job in the OS, and then by being able to get this job to automatically connect to the Oracle database, wreak havock in this way. Surely for an active DBA, this would be harder to spot than an entry in the DBA_JOBS dictionary view!

>From what I've heard about the DBA team on site ( who I've not actually
met to be fair to them), they seem to be, ahem, 'reluctant' when it comes to anything that might disturph their daily routine of minimal hassle, so I want to be prepared when the politics of my change come up for discussion.

If anybody reading this feels they can contribute anything else to support my arguments (or the site DBA's), please feel free to contribute.

Cheers.

James Received on Mon Dec 19 2005 - 12:03:27 CST