Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (757 mails)

["Ulrich Windl" <ulrich.windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30 May 2006 at 15:02, Andreas Hanke wrote:

> Kenneth Schneider schrieb:
> > True, if you want a less secure OS use MS windows. If you want a more
> > secure OS use linux
> > 
> >> If a home user does not want to type the root-password each time he is 
> >> installing a program, then this is his choice.
> > 
> > Then just login as root all the time.
> > 
> > Again, linux is not MS windows and should -not- be made to act like it.
> 
> Why do we need these Windows-Linux comparisons? Superuser capabilities
> are a genuine UNIX feature. There is nothing "MS Windows-like" in having
> an option to grant users certain permissions.

If you can take away root'srights via ACLs in Linux, MS-Windows and Linux are 
comparable: Take away all rights from root, then root is nothing special any more.
Likewise: Add all rights to the Administrator in Windows, and you have something 
like root in Linux.


> 
> It shouldn't be the default, of course, but nobody seriously proposes
> insecure defaults. sudo exists anyway, so I fail to see the point why
> having such an option in the software updater can be a problem.
> 
> Educating people how to manage their systems is out of scope in this
> discussion IMHO. If someone wants to grant permissions, he will do it
> anyway, does it really matter if it's the classical UNIX tool named sudo
> or a built-in feature of the software updater?

I think the real problem is when the user has to guess the security concepts. 
(Just like in Windows: Most users don't know they are working as Administrator 
(Default installation)

Regards,
Ulrich