tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1271763227002553835.post7002760891830633048..comments2024-03-26T08:42:34.744+01:00Comments on Notes on Oracle: DBMS_REDACT and complete ROW updateAlex Nuijtenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06345615264010120428noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1271763227002553835.post-48868560380950254032014-10-03T05:11:12.062+02:002014-10-03T05:11:12.062+02:00It makes sense from a technical standpoint: of cou...It makes sense from a technical standpoint: of course the "xx" are written back to the database because that what you tell it to do.. It doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint: data that you are not allowed to see (hence redacted) you would also not be allowed to modify.<br />This post was just meant as a warning: some applications out there do an update regardless of whether the data was changed by the user or not. If you do, you might end up with a situation that you didn't call for.Alex Nuijtenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06345615264010120428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1271763227002553835.post-79743677596610502632014-10-01T04:58:19.667+02:002014-10-01T04:58:19.667+02:00I think it makes perfect sense. You didn't loo...I think it makes perfect sense. You didn't loose any data. You retrieved redacted data from the table and then used that data to perform an update. Maybe you didn't alter the data yourself, but your data was altered by the database while retrieving.<br />If this wasn't the case, you might get to the data using this as a workaround.Patrick Barelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234439984999344625noreply@blogger.com