SQLCLR vs. SQL Server 2012 & 2014 & 2016, Part 7: “CLR strict security” ‚Äď The Problem Continues … in the Past (Wait, What?!?)

Using SQLCLR on SQL Server 2012, 2014, or 2016? Jealous of the "fun" those on SQL 2017 are having with "CLR strict security"? Come see how you can join the party ūüėľ

SQLCLR vs. SQL Server 2017, Part 6: ‚ÄúTrusted Assemblies‚ÄĚ ‚Äď Whitelisted Assemblies can’t do Module Signing

"Trusted Assemblies", a new feature starting in SQL Server 2017, is a means of whitelisting Assemblies that one feels pose no threat, and can be created (and used) without needing to be a) signed and b) have a corresponding signature-based Login that has been granted the UNSAFE ASSEMBLY permission. In Part 4 of this series… Continue reading SQLCLR vs. SQL Server 2017, Part 6: ‚ÄúTrusted Assemblies‚ÄĚ ‚Äď Whitelisted Assemblies can’t do Module Signing

SQLCLR vs. SQL Server 2017, Part 5: ‚ÄúTrusted Assemblies‚ÄĚ – Valid Use Cases?

In the previous post in this series on SQLCLR in SQL Server 2017 — Part 4: ‚ÄúTrusted Assemblies‚ÄĚ — The Disappointment ‚ÄĒ we looked at what the "Trusted Assemblies" feature is, what it meant to do, the problems with it, and what the better and more appropriate approach is. "Trusted Assemblies" is a simple mechanism… Continue reading SQLCLR vs. SQL Server 2017, Part 5: ‚ÄúTrusted Assemblies‚ÄĚ – Valid Use Cases?

SQLCLR vs. SQL Server 2017, Part 4: ‚ÄúTrusted Assemblies‚ÄĚ – The Disappointment

"Trusted Assemblies", introduced in RC1 of SQL Server 2017, seems like a reasonable fix for one, if not two, problems resulting from the new "CLR strict security" setting. But are there any problems with it? And even if not (don't worry, there are), might there be a better approach? Perhaps something simple that was overlooked?