Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230
Suggestion: Sudo in standart installation
Suggestion: Sudo in standart installation
Pretty simple:
Is there any specific installation that a default-configured sudo option is only avaliable in the expert install? I believe it would be a good option to include directly in the normal install, because, I hope we agree, sudo is much safer.
Is there any specific reason this has been left out? If it is a very tricky thing to do, I apologise for my ignorance.
Just curious.
Comradely, DingoBoy.
Is there any specific installation that a default-configured sudo option is only avaliable in the expert install? I believe it would be a good option to include directly in the normal install, because, I hope we agree, sudo is much safer.
Is there any specific reason this has been left out? If it is a very tricky thing to do, I apologise for my ignorance.
Just curious.
Comradely, DingoBoy.
- Telemachus
- Posts: 4574
- Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: Suggestion: Sudo in standart installation
Ah, but there's the rub. We don't agree: sudo is not much safer.DingoBoy wrote:Pretty simple:
Is there any specific installation that a default-configured sudo option is only avaliable in the expert install? I believe it would be a good option to include directly in the normal install, because, I hope we agree, sudo is much safer.
It's easy to install, if you want it. Just use your favorite package manager and install sudo. Then use the helper program visudo to set it up.
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
The "default configuration" of SUDO is to behave as though SUDO was not installed (i.e., no privileges granted except to root). I don't see any real problem were SUDO to be automatically installed using this configuration, but I also don't see much point.
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it. -- Brian Kernighan
I don't see how sudo is much safer if abused to be an alternative to su. It is meant to allow people who need to do certain things root privileges FOR THOSE THINGS ONLY(hence why the root password isn't asked for). For example, I have a script that takes down a network interface and brings it back up; I use sudo(and a wrapper script) to allow the other users of this machine to use it without problem(note that sudo's configured to only let them run the script, not ifupdown). Using sudo to replace su is just asking to get your system shot to hell since malware just has to put itself in a loop, periodically trying sudo until you do something requiring admin rights and therefore allowing the malware the ability to cripple your system without so much as your password. You can configure sudo to always require a password, but then it's little different than su -c 'command'.
I think it would be a very bad idea.
Sudo is meant to be used in a specific way, like BioTube described, to grant normal users privileges to a command which normally requires root access.
It is not meant as a replacement for the root account, even though Ubuntu makes you think otherwise. The Ubuntu way is WRONG as it makes it's users forget the importance of security, since most of it's users grant all root privileges to all users.
Linux is so secure because when you are going to make system-wide changes you need root access, which is a good reminder that you're going to do sth significant to your system and you should be careful what you're doing.
Ubuntu's use of sudo pretty much negates that, by not 'bothering' you with such issues as security
Sudo is a very powerfull and useful tool and they even recommend it's use in Linux Administration Handbook (2nd edition), but only in the way it was meant to be used: to get what they want.
Including it in the default install encourages the wrong way to use sudo, so that's why I think it's a bad idea.
Sudo is meant to be used in a specific way, like BioTube described, to grant normal users privileges to a command which normally requires root access.
It is not meant as a replacement for the root account, even though Ubuntu makes you think otherwise. The Ubuntu way is WRONG as it makes it's users forget the importance of security, since most of it's users grant all root privileges to all users.
Linux is so secure because when you are going to make system-wide changes you need root access, which is a good reminder that you're going to do sth significant to your system and you should be careful what you're doing.
Ubuntu's use of sudo pretty much negates that, by not 'bothering' you with such issues as security
Sudo is a very powerfull and useful tool and they even recommend it's use in Linux Administration Handbook (2nd edition), but only in the way it was meant to be used:
Ppl who realize that will know that all they have to do issudo description wrote:Provide limited super user privileges to specific users
Sudo is a program designed to allow a sysadmin to give limited root privileges to users and log root activity. The basic philosophy is
to give as few privileges as possible but still allow people to get their work done.
Code: Select all
aptitude install sudo
Including it in the default install encourages the wrong way to use sudo, so that's why I think it's a bad idea.
-
- Posts: 1137
- Joined: 2007-07-24 03:31
- Location: California
Re: Suggestion: Sudo in standart installation
A default-configured sudo in the expert install comes at the expense of not configuring the root account. This is unacceptable.DingoBoy wrote:Pretty simple:
Is there any specific installation that a default-configured sudo option is only avaliable in the expert install? I believe it would be a good option to include directly in the normal install, because, I hope we agree, sudo is much safer.
Is there any specific reason this has been left out? If it is a very tricky thing to do, I apologise for my ignorance.
Just curious.
Comradely, DingoBoy.
-
- Posts: 1137
- Joined: 2007-07-24 03:31
- Location: California
- Jackiebrown
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: 2007-01-02 04:46
- Location: San Antonio, TX
I use it the way BioTube does - for very specific apps.
The difference is, no one else uses my machine so its mainly one or two apps that I use multiple times a day or for a script.
I think the only one set right now is make (which is probably one of the more dangerous ones to set, but since I compile KDE daily, I was willing to sacrifice risk it versus going into my bash history and deleting it every time I type the password to quick after typing su.
The difference is, no one else uses my machine so its mainly one or two apps that I use multiple times a day or for a script.
I think the only one set right now is make (which is probably one of the more dangerous ones to set, but since I compile KDE daily, I was willing to sacrifice risk it versus going into my bash history and deleting it every time I type the password to quick after typing su.
-
- Posts: 1137
- Joined: 2007-07-24 03:31
- Location: California
Looks kind of official and kind of scary ...http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-desktop/ wrote:We will try to ensure that software is configured for the most common desktop use. For instance, the regular user account added by default during installation should have permission to play audio and video, print, and manage the system through sudo.
- Jackiebrown
- Posts: 1246
- Joined: 2007-01-02 04:46
- Location: San Antonio, TX
Personally I won't use sudo at all. I just don't see any point not to mention the complete and total lack of securty it creates. I've never booted Ubuntu. What happens if you do this?
(Don't try this at home boys & girls)
Would it nuke your entire dir?
Code: Select all
sudo rm -rf /some/dir
Would it nuke your entire dir?
Debian Sid Laptops:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-55 / 1.5G
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86GHz / 3G
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-55 / 1.5G
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86GHz / 3G
- Telemachus
- Posts: 4574
- Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53
- Been thanked: 2 times
I'm not sure I follow your argument. Assume you are using Ubuntu: after you type that command, you still have to enter a password. Ubuntu is not set to allow password-free superuser privileges to regular users. One gotcha, however, is that I believe the default in Ubuntu is a 15 minute no-password period, after you enter your pass. That is, every subsequent sudo command for the next 15 minutes does not require a password. That's a very poor default, I think.mzilikazi wrote:Personally I won't use sudo at all. I just don't see any point not to mention the complete and total lack of securty it creates. I've never booted Ubuntu. What happens if you do this?(Don't try this at home boys & girls)Code: Select all
sudo rm -rf /some/dir
Would it nuke your entire dir?
That said, in Debian what's to stop me from entering this?
Code: Select all
su -c 'rm -rf /some/dir'
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
The difference is that you have a user & root and only root can do those sorts of things. Keep in mind that not evey system has only one user.Telemachus wrote: That said, in Debian what's to stop me from entering this?The only difference is that after I type that, I need to enter a root password rather than my regular user password. I agree that this is somewhat more secure, but it isn't night and day.Code: Select all
su -c 'rm -rf /some/dir'
That 15 minutes of no sudo password....yeah that wouldn't be secure at all (if that is in fact how it works).
Personally, I always thought it much faster to just get root and do what it is you have to do rather than typing sudo each time.
Debian Sid Laptops:
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-55 / 1.5G
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86GHz / 3G
AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor TK-55 / 1.5G
Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86GHz / 3G
- Telemachus
- Posts: 4574
- Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53
- Been thanked: 2 times
Not secure and not smart. It's a default setting on at least two distros that I know of (Ubuntu, Mac OS X), but it's easily changed. On the other hand, many of the people using those distros don't know how to change it.mzilikazi wrote:That 15 minutes of no sudo password....yeah that wouldn't be secure at all (if that is in fact how it works).
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Debian's default is also 15 minutes.Telemachus wrote:Not secure and not smart. It's a default setting on at least two distros that I know of (Ubuntu, Mac OS X), but it's easily changed. On the other hand, many of the people using those distros don't know how to change it.mzilikazi wrote:That 15 minutes of no sudo password....yeah that wouldn't be secure at all (if that is in fact how it works).
- Telemachus
- Posts: 4574
- Joined: 2006-12-25 15:53
- Been thanked: 2 times
Maybe 15 minutes is the default sudo default. That is, if sudo is installed, a 15 minute time per entry of password is the default.bugsbunny wrote:Debian's default is also 15 minutes.Telemachus wrote:Not secure and not smart. It's a default setting on at least two distros that I know of (Ubuntu, Mac OS X), but it's easily changed. On the other hand, many of the people using those distros don't know how to change it.mzilikazi wrote:That 15 minutes of no sudo password....yeah that wouldn't be secure at all (if that is in fact how it works).
"We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful."
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System