alter table inside a stored procedure

Hi,
Our application needs to issue an alter table statement. Since the user
using
the application does not have dbo permission, we are planning to use
a stored procedure with dynamic sql.
SET @.RUNSQL = "alter table dbo.gggg .."
EXEC(@.RUNSQL)
The stored procedure is owned by dbo. However it is not allowing
the alter table because of lack of permission. Does that mean
that any EXEC inside a stored procedure does not run as user
dbo.
Is there a workaround for it?
thanks.Hi
Well , if you use dynamic sql within a stored procedure, user must have
permissions (SELECT,UPDATE...) on underlyaing tables.
<dcruncher4@.aim.com> wrote in message
news:1140310808.885046.206220@.g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> Our application needs to issue an alter table statement. Since the user
> using
> the application does not have dbo permission, we are planning to use
> a stored procedure with dynamic sql.
> SET @.RUNSQL = "alter table dbo.gggg .."
> EXEC(@.RUNSQL)
> The stored procedure is owned by dbo. However it is not allowing
> the alter table because of lack of permission. Does that mean
> that any EXEC inside a stored procedure does not run as user
> dbo.
> Is there a workaround for it?
> thanks.
>|||This is a security feature.

> Is there a workaround for it?
In 2005, you can specify EXECUTE AS for the procedure.
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
Blog: http://solidqualitylearning.com/blogs/tibor/
<dcruncher4@.aim.com> wrote in message news:1140310808.885046.206220@.g47g2000cwa.googlegroups
.com...
> Hi,
> Our application needs to issue an alter table statement. Since the user
> using
> the application does not have dbo permission, we are planning to use
> a stored procedure with dynamic sql.
> SET @.RUNSQL = "alter table dbo.gggg .."
> EXEC(@.RUNSQL)
> The stored procedure is owned by dbo. However it is not allowing
> the alter table because of lack of permission. Does that mean
> that any EXEC inside a stored procedure does not run as user
> dbo.
> Is there a workaround for it?
> thanks.
>|||To add to the other responses, an unbroken ownership chain (e.g. 'dbo' owns
all objects involved) does not change the execution context. With an
unbroken chain, *object* permissions are simply not checked on indirectly
referenced objects and note that dynamic SQL always breaks the ownership
chain. *Statement* permissions (e.g. ALTER TABLE) are always checked in the
execution security context. The execution context can't be changed on
versions prior to SQL 2005.
The need to execute DDL by non-privileged users and use dynamic SQL can
indicate an application design issue. Perhaps someone can suggest an
alternative if you provide the requirements driving this approach.
Hope this helps.
Dan Guzman
SQL Server MVP
<dcruncher4@.aim.com> wrote in message
news:1140310808.885046.206220@.g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
> Our application needs to issue an alter table statement. Since the user
> using
> the application does not have dbo permission, we are planning to use
> a stored procedure with dynamic sql.
> SET @.RUNSQL = "alter table dbo.gggg .."
> EXEC(@.RUNSQL)
> The stored procedure is owned by dbo. However it is not allowing
> the alter table because of lack of permission. Does that mean
> that any EXEC inside a stored procedure does not run as user
> dbo.
> Is there a workaround for it?
> thanks.
>