(we maintain OrioleDB) Mostly because the TAM API isn't mature enough yet. Hopefully we can upstream more patches so that it's possible
> undo-based MVCC storage engine project stall?
From what I could gather, it ran out of steam simply because of the difficulty of the task. There is a lot of work involved to get the requisite patches into core and the community are (correctly) cautious
I’m sure there could be questions, given the brevity of this blog post. I’m happy to answer anything specific
I’ve been chatting to Dennis for a long time now and our product-ideas were very aligned. We will share more about this project in a few ShowHN’s over the coming months
> The danger is when apps expose the service_role key (or the new sb_secret_... format)
Fwiw, the new secret keys are automatically revoked if they are pushed to github, and github is progressively rolling out push protection - to prevent them getting pushed in the first place. Of course, not everyone uses github
People disabling RLS, or making RLS a simple pass-through, is a battle we are constantly fighting. We have made good strides here over the past 12 months:
- ai to write secure policies (if they are too lazy or confused to do it themselves)
- big red labels when a table is exposed
- weekly emails with security alerts
- dashboard alerts and security advisors
- contractually requiring Vibe coding platforms to expose our Security Advisors if they are integrating with us
- red teaming customers that have egregious issues (this has been surprisingly effective, just harder to scale up)
I appreciate you creating this tool - as you can see we are also “tooling up” as much as we can. If there are any other things that you think we are missing let me know and we will prioritize it
We will be introducing new AuthZ patterns this year so I’m hoping that will also help
Thanks, Paul, for the comment. It means a lot to me.
I also published a recap of what Supabase has been doing over the last year to improve all of this:
https://supaexplorer.com/dev-notes/supabase-security-2025-wh...
I now think it makes sense to include it in the top notice I added to my report, next to where it says "Supabase is NOT insecure by design," since key revocation was one of those changes.
I believe we all know, at least the ones who care about this topic, that you've been making a lot of improvements and adding extra annoying (but justified!) UI features to make this issue more prominent and push people to fix it.
"- contractually requiring Vibe coding platforms to expose our Security Advisors if they are integrating with us" - I like this, and I honestly would love to see those platforms truly enforce it, even when the user is just building an MVP not ready for production, which most of the time ends up there.
And definitely, any improvement in authz will be very helpful, especially if it can be pushed via external coding platforms.
Thank you, Paul! Great to see Supabase wrappers evolve. I really love the async streaming feature. It helps address use cases involving (reliably) moving larger datasets from ClickHouse to Postgres for supporting (stricter) transactional workloads.
Very excited to continue working closely to further integrate these amazing open source database technologies and make it easier for users. :)
> get more Supabase Realtime back into the game if the price was more viable too
feel free to reach out to me on twitter (same username) to discuss this if you want. we are starting to think of realtime in the context of gaming so if you have feedback it would help us shape the pricing
impressive work jmo - thanks for open sourcing this (and OSI-compliant)
we are working on a challenge which is somewhat like a homomorphic encryption problem - I'm wondering if OpenPCC could help in some way? :
When developing websites/apps, developers generally use logs to debug production issues. However with wearables, logs can be privacy issue: imagine some AR glasses logging visual data (like someone's face). Would OpenPCC help to extract/clean/anonymize this sort of data for developers to help with their debugging?
Yep, you could run an anonymization workload inside the OpenPCC compute node. We target inference as the "workload" but it's really just attested HTTP server where you can't see inside. So, in this case your client (the wearable) would send its data first through OpenPCC to a server that runs some anonymization process.
If it's possible to anonymize on the wearable, that would be simpler.
The challenge is what does the anonymizer "do" to be perfect?
As an aside, IMO homomorphic encryption (still) isn't ready...
this is the last of a 9-part series on database consensus algorithms (like Paxos and Raft):
> Raft improved accessibility but remains a monolithic algorithm that's risky to modify. This has effectively limited our flexibility in adapting consensus systems to modern cloud architectures.
hey DANmode - supabase ceo here. similar to the sibling thread I want to make sure I know what happened here:
1. someone created an website using supabase with email logins (and possibly edited the template / opt-out link)
2. someone signed you up to that service - you received an email from that app
3. you sent us an email (to support@supabase.io or similar) to report abuse
4. we emailed a few months later with the generic email you posted
First, I'm sorry you had a bad experience. we have been historically very on-top of our support emails, but this year the tickets have grown ~10x while our team can only grow ~2x. We have had to make short-term trade-offs (automations) which are sub-par so that we can catch up with the growth and primarily focus on the paying customers
I'm be the first to acknowledge that this is something we want to improve. Unfortunately that will take time and iterations - you are experiencing our support (i hope) at it's worst. We sent an email to the backlog of unanswered free-plan emails just to acknowledge and redirect them somewhere we can offer more support
This process is to ensure that we _don't_ miss emails, like we did with yours.
You post here is helpful for us to figure out the areas that we need to improve. Again, I'm sorry that we didn't give you a good impression the first time - all we can do is iterate based on feedback like yours. If you want to share more my email is in my profile
I believe the biggest issue is that the ONLY lever the email gave the user to pull (the Opt-Out of these emails link) was broken.
(FYI: It's working now.)
I still don't even know if that does what I think it does (it sounds like marketing list opt-out).
/
/
How is a user, who has been signed up for your services without their knowledge, meant to "opt out" of the trial, or account, after the point of receiving the email,
if they never even initiated the account on your end?
(we maintain OrioleDB) Mostly because the TAM API isn't mature enough yet. Hopefully we can upstream more patches so that it's possible
> undo-based MVCC storage engine project stall?
From what I could gather, it ran out of steam simply because of the difficulty of the task. There is a lot of work involved to get the requisite patches into core and the community are (correctly) cautious
reply