I have a scenario where I need to allow a user in one database access to objects in another database on the SAME SQL server.
SQL SERVER SETUP:
I have an SQL Server 2008 Express instance running.
Within that instance I have the following :
2 databases :
DATABASE1
DATABASE2
2 logins :
ADMIN1
ADMIN2
DATABASE1 has a user (USER1) created on ADMIN1 and has permissions on SELECT, UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT and GRANT EXECUTE on stored procedures in DATABASE1
DATABASE2 has a user (USER2) created on ADMIN2 and has permissions on SELECT, UPDATE, DELETE, INSERT and GRANT EXECUTE on stored procedures in DATABASE2
QUESTION :
What I require is to allow 'USER1' SELECT/EXECUTE permission to tables and stored procedures in DATABASE2
I have tried a few snippets of SQL from a few posts but I have no idea how to write the SQL.
I also tried doing it manually in the way of ticking checkboxes for permissions by right clicking the user and logins in Management Studio but
I need SQL to execute in my scripts.
THE REASON FOR MY QUESTION
I have tables in DATABASE1 and DATABASE2 which are related but obviously we cant create Foreign Key constraints across different databases.
The best way we have thought to handle the relationship between the 2 tables is to create a stored procedure in DATABASE1 to query the
relevant table in DATABASE2 and return a result.
Apologies for not being able to post any examples as I cannot find any examples out there through my searches which match the scenario I have described above.
If I can give any further information please let me know.
Many thanks
Kev
As long as your user is defined at the instance level, you can grant them whatever rights they need in each database. Create your users under the master, and then add them as users of each database granting them whatever rights are needed per the specific DB.
EDITED with more detail (based on comments):
First, you need to create a Database Login. This is a login that can then be added as a user to one or more databases on your instance.
Details Here (including SQL syntax): http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189751.aspx
Second, you need to provision the user in the database (Database1, Database2, etc...). You will want to have these users added identically to each of these product databases that gets installed. As long as the user is there, you will be able to query across the various DBs on your instance.
Details Here (Including SQL): http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa337545.aspx
Good Luck!
Related
I have created a view in Database A that looks at tables in Database B that the users in Database A do not have access to (HR Data).
Is there a way I can grant anybody calling the view in Database A permissions to see the results, without giving access to the underlying tables?
Both databases are on the same instance, SQL Server 2019
You can just
GRANT SELECT ON OBJECT::[schema].[theView] TO User1,User2
in your Database A? This way you'd just give SELECT permissions to the view itself, and not the tables.
If you have a lot of cases like this, you can also consider creating a special schema for this and do:
GRANT select ON Schema :: [DBO] TO User1
instead.
I have a Stored Procedure in Database A, that references 3 tables in Database B. Both Databases are on Server 1.
I gave the user:
public permission on Server 1
EXECUTE permissions on the Stored Procedure in Database A
An entry with no permissions on Database B
However, this isn't sufficient. I end up having to assign SELECT permissions to the user, for the 3 tables in Database B (plus SELECT permissions on the schema). Then things work - but why is that necessary?
Per Microsoft, this shouldn't be the case:
"Stored procedures take advantage of ownership chaining to provide access to data so that users do not need to have explicit permission to access database objects."
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/data/adonet/sql/managing-permissions-with-stored-procedures-in-sql-server
Googling, I see this concept confirmed.
This is my first time assigning permissions to anyone though, so obviously I'm missing something and/or misunderstanding.
Edit: "Permissions only chain within a single database." That explains it!
"Permissions only chain within a single database." per comment from Larnu. That explains it.
I am building an application consisting of an SQL Server 2008 R2 back-end and an MS Access front-end.
All data is kept in SQL Server.
MS Access is a just a bunch of forms, controls and VBA ADO objects that call stored procedures on the SQL server, ie. users interface with SQL server through stored procedures only.
These stored procedures are a combination of ones that don't alter the state of the database (eg. select from table/view/function) and some that do alter state (eg. insert/update/delete/merge)
On SQL Server, I have an AD Group called 'ADG', which is both a Server Login and a Database User. Users of the MS Access front-end are members of ADG.
All of the SQL Server database objects (tables, views, functions and stored procedures) are under a single, specific schema called 'ABC' that is owned by dbo. There are other schemas in the database, again, all owned by dbo.
I have been reading up on 'Ownership Chaining' and would like clarification of the following:
Is 'dbo' the 'owner' of the tables, views, functions and stored procedure under the 'ABC' schema by virtue of its ownership of the 'ABC' schema?
Given the above set up of the application and depending on the answer to 1., is 'EXECUTE' on the ABC schema, the only permission I
need granted to ADG or do I need any others?
Any help in clarification is appreciated.
Check out https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms191465.aspx for a good picture of the permission hierarchy.
If all your objects are in the same ABC schema, then the owner of the schema is effectively the owner of the underlying objects. Again, see the diagram in the link above for a clear picture.
EXECUTE is a specific permission to execute stored procedures. You can do the same for functions unless the function returns a table, then you need SELECT permissions. So if you GRANT EXECUTE on SCHEMA::ABC TO adg then you've just allowed adg to run sprocs. They still may not have access to data depending on how the sprocs were written. Look up details on permissions in SQL Server books online for details on what you need to grant (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms191291.aspx)
SQL Server is not my strong point and I start to get lost when going past the basic Create Table, Select from Table etc.
I am attempting to set up a database synchronisation scenario with an Microsoft SQLCompact 3.5 database being Synced through a Proxy to and SQL 2008 R2 database. It is being synced through the Microsoft Sync Framework 2.1.
I got everything set up and working fine through the proxy when the user account is the db_owner of the database.
Of course this now needs to be locked down - so I have been trying to restrict the permissions to the bare minimum required for Synchronisation.
According to the Microsoft articles, I need to do the following...
Use the principle of least permission. Do not grant more permissions than are required to perform a specific task. For example, do not grant INSERT permissions for server database tables that are involved in download-only synchronization. Synchronization operations require the following permissions:
EXECUTE permissions on all the stored procedures that Sync Framework uses to read and write to metadata tables and base tables.
SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE permissions for metadata tables and any base tables that will be updated during a synchronization session.
When you provision SQL Server databases that use SqlSyncProvider, be aware of the following permissions requirements for provisioning:
CREATE TABLE permissions to enable creation of the metadata tables: scope_info and scope_config, and the tracking tables that are created for each base table.
ALTER TABLE to add triggers to the base tables.
CREATE PROCEDURE permissions to create the procedures that Sync Framework requires.
SELECT and INSERT permissions for scope_info and scope_config tables.
SELECT permissions for base tables.
I allowed the wizards in Visual Studio 2010 to create the Sync database and proxy for me.
As such - I am unable to find the scope_info and scope_config tables in SQL Server databases, and I am also unable to find the metadata tables so cannot set permissions on these tables. Also - where would I find the stored procedures that the Synchronisation framework is trying to use - I have looked but cannto find them.
Where would I find these and how would I go about setting the appropriate permissions?
I have granted datareader and datawriter, Insert, Update, Delete and Select as well as Execute permissions on the SQL Server database but the sync fails. I have also granted Create Table, Create Procedure and ALTER permissions on the database for the user as well- but still it fails.
If i enable the db_owner role for the user - it works.
The error I receive is:
Unable to initialize the client database, because the schema for table 'tblApplications, tblApplicationConfiguration, tblApplicationInstallProperties, tblApplicationPreRequisites, tblApplicationTypes, tblComputerApps, tblComputers, tblComputerTypes, tblDriveHWSerials, tblDrives, tblDriveTypes, tblFunctions, tblLocationApps, tblLocationComputers, tblLocationIPAddress, tblLocations, tblLocationUsers, tblPermissions, tblRegionLocations, tblRegions, tblRegisteredModules, tblRequestFormats, tblRequestStatus, tblRequestTypes, tblRoles, tblRoleUsers, tblSecurity, tblUsers, tblVehicle, tblVehicleLocationMap, tblVehicleMake, tblRequestProcessingStatus, tblDriveStatus, tblVideoViewTypes' could not be retrieved by the GetSchema() method of DbServerSyncProvider.
Make sure that you can establish a connection to the client database and that either the SelectIncrementalInsertsCommand property or the SelectIncrementalUpdatesCommand property of the SyncAdapter is specified correctly.
I am not able to use the db_owner role when its released.
there are two types of database providers in Sync Framework, the offline provider (SqlCeClientSyncProvider/DbServerSyncProvider) which is used by the Local Database Cache project item and the collaboration/peer-to-peer provider (SqlSyncProvider/SqlCeSyncProvider).
the offline providers dont use the scope_xxx tables as such you wont find it.
assuming you used the default SQL Server Change Tracking when you configured the sync via the wizard, try granting VIEW CHANGE TRACKING permission to the account you're using to connect to the database.
I'm not sure if it will help, but I found this:
Try to set UploadOnly on the SyncTable object instead. When you set it on the SyncAdapterBuidler, the select incremental commands are not generated by the builder. These commands are used to get the table schema from the database. Since these are missing you are getting the schema error.
Also, maybe this blog entry will help.
As JuneT Mentioned, you should turn on Change Tracking
ALTER DATABASE YourDataBaseName
SET CHANGE_TRACKING = ON
(CHANGE_RETENTION = 2 DAYS, AUTO_CLEANUP = ON)
I have several stored procedures in my database that are used to load data from a datamart that is housed in a separate database. These procedures are, generally, in the form:
CREATE PROCEDURE load_stuff
WITH EXECUTE AS OWNER AS
INSERT INTO my_db.dbo.report_table
(
column_a
)
SELECT
column_b
FROM data_mart.dbo.source_table
WHERE
foo = 'bar';
These run fine when I execute the query in SQL Server Management Studio. When I try to execute them using EXEC load_stuff, the procedure fails with a security warning:
The server principal "the_user" is not able to access the database "data_mart" under the current security context.
The OWNER of the sproc is dbo, which is the_user (for the sake of our example). The OWNER of both databases is also the_user and the_user is mapped to dbo (which is what SQL Server should do).
Why would I be seeing this error in SQL Server? Is this because the user in question is being aliased as dbo and I should use a different user account for my cross-database data access?
Edit
I understand that this is because SQL Server disables cross database ownership chaining by default, which is good. However, I'm not sure of the best practice in this situation. If anyone has any input on the best practice for this scenario, it would be greatly appreciated.
Edit 2
The eventual solution was to set TRUSTWORTHY ON on both of the databases. This allows for limited ownership chaining between the two databases without resorting to full database ownership chaining.
Why not remove EXECUTE AS OWNER?
Usually, my user executing the SP would have appropriate rights in both databases, and I don't have to do that at all.
There is no need to create login, you can just enable guest user in target DB.
grant connect to guest
This allows executing user to enter DB under guest context, and when "db chaining is ON access will not be checked in target DB.
Actually, DBO is a role (you can consider it as a group of users), not a user in himself. (Unless you can connect to SQL SERVER using dbo:passwordfordbo it's not a user).
Usually, in the wonderful world of SQL Server, if you grant userX right to execute storedprocY then X gets the right to perform all the task Y contains even if he doesn't have all the permission on all the objects used in Y.
That's an extremely useful feature to encapsulate business logic in a stored procedure. (Your user have NO access on the table but they do can EXECUTE one stored proc).
When we talk about "ownership chaining" it means the following (please correct me if I am wrong though)
- If ownership chaining is disabled: the right to execute procedureX will work as long as all the required objects are in the same database
- Of chaining is enabled: That "privilege" will expands towards all databases.
Hope that helps,