Stored Procedure and Permissions - Is EXECUTE enough?

Question

I have a SQL Server 2008 database where all access to the underlying tables is done through stored procedures. Some stored procedures simply SELECT records from the tables while others UPDATE, INSERT, and DELETE.

If a stored procedure UPDATES a table does the user executing the stored procedure also need UPDATE permissions to the affected tables or is the fact that they have EXECUTE permissions to the stored procedure enough?

Basically I am wondering if giving the user EXECUTE permissions to the stored procedures is enough or do I need to give them SELECT, UPDATE, DELETE, and INSERT permissions to the tables in order for the stored procedures to work. Thank you.

[EDIT] In most of my stored procedures it does indeed appear that EXECUTE is enough. However, I did find that in stored procedures where "Execute sp_Executesql" was used that EXECUTE was not enough. The tables involved needed to have permissions for the actions being performed within "sp_Executesql".

Answer 1

Permissions on tables are not checked (including DENY) if tables and proc have the same owner. They can be in different schemas too as long as the schemas have the same owner.

See Ownership chaining on MSDN

Edit, from a comment from a deleted answer.

The context is always the current login unless EXECUTE AS as been used: only referenced object DML permissions are not checked. Try OBJECT_ID(referencedtable) in a stored proc where no rights are assigned to referencedtable. It gives NULL. If executed by the owner of the stored proc then it would give a value because owener has rights on referencedtable