|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 122 responses total. |
keesan
|
|
response 45 of 122:
| 
Dec 19 16:37 UTC 2006 |
I seem to need root privileges to do much of anything so I have been running
as root for four years with no problems. 'user' could not use zgv, and when
I typed mutt (telnetted with Windows to linux) I got very loud noise.
|
ball
|
|
response 46 of 122:
|
Dec 19 17:04 UTC 2006 |
Literally a loud noise? I think the only noise you're likely
to hear from a telnet session is the bell, but perhaps if
the speakers were cranked up, that might be surprising. If
you have to be root all the time, then your unix is broken.
|
gull
|
|
response 47 of 122:
|
Dec 19 20:20 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:43: Some of the PCI adapters sold for use with wireless cards
are not actually generic PCMCIA slots, but rather adapters specially
designed for that company's cards.
|
keesan
|
|
response 48 of 122:
|
Dec 19 21:44 UTC 2006 |
The noise sounded like very loud static. Windows seems to be set up to make
noises on that computer despite my checking off Mute - is there some place
to tell it not to make system noises? My linux is designed to run as root.
svgalib has problems when used as user, so does Xvesa, then I would need
to give myself privileges to save files to various directories. Most of the
time I spend doing administration (adding and modifying programs, compiling,
etc.).
|
ball
|
|
response 49 of 122:
|
Dec 19 23:10 UTC 2006 |
There is something wrong with the MS Windows machine (either
with the hardware, or with the driver software) if it is
making a loud hash noise while you have mute selected. It
seems as though data that doesn't represent sound is somehow
finding its way to the digital-to-analogue convertor (DAC).
If your Linux is designed to run as root, then I consider
its design broken.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 50 of 122:
|
Dec 19 23:19 UTC 2006 |
That's the way "Linspire" (formerly "Lindows") is designed to run,
though I doubt that's the distro she's using.
I wouldn't want to run that way, but some people do.
|
ball
|
|
response 51 of 122:
|
Dec 19 23:23 UTC 2006 |
/me shudders
|
keesan
|
|
response 52 of 122:
|
Dec 20 01:41 UTC 2006 |
I have the same software on several machines and can easily restore it. I
am root in DOS, why not in linux? Win98 also played all the WIndows noises
at the library despite being muted. How do I turn off Windows noises? I can
turn off online Opera noises.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 53 of 122:
|
Dec 20 02:06 UTC 2006 |
> I am root in DOS, why not in linux?
For the very same reason you shouldn't be root in DOS (which, admittedly
has no other options) or in Windows (which, nowadays at least, does) --
that always running at the highest privilege level makes it trivially
easy for a rogue program to corrupt the entire system.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 54 of 122:
|
Dec 20 03:43 UTC 2006 |
Some of us who have to follow accepted security practices in our work
generally do the same at home because it keeps up our "A" game. On top
of that I consider a lot of the data I keep at home to be fairly
important and I like to see it protected against loss.
|
keesan
|
|
response 55 of 122:
|
Dec 20 20:40 UTC 2006 |
But I don't have any rogue programs and have not had problems in four years
and if I did I would just copy back the software from one computer to another.
Today I am trying to figure out why udhcpc does not work with my small laptop
kernel but does with another, so I tried a third. Stuck in a wireless card
in the kitchen, forgot to plug in the router, got an IP number and three dns
numbers from some network with signal strength -139dB (noise -156dB) but it
did not last long, went back to signal strength 1/48 to 17/48. For the 20
seconds it lasted I could go online with two browsers, so all I need now is
to wait for the free county wireless signal, or take the linux computer to
the library instead of windows. Victory! (I still need to fix my laptop
kernel to use udhcpc). I have detected four networks with iwconfig too.
|
cross
|
|
response 56 of 122:
|
Dec 21 00:08 UTC 2006 |
Regarding #55; That you know of, you mean.
In general, running is root is considered bad form. If you can get away with
it, then great; but don't be surprised if it bites you in the butt one day.
|
keesan
|
|
response 57 of 122:
|
Dec 21 02:12 UTC 2006 |
Where would a rogue program come from and what is it?
|
cross
|
|
response 58 of 122:
|
Dec 21 03:02 UTC 2006 |
It could come from anywhere. The `rm' command, if used without caution as
root, could become a `rogue' program.
|
ball
|
|
response 59 of 122:
|
Dec 21 03:09 UTC 2006 |
That's a good point: Running as a user helps to protect you
not just from other systems or people with hostile intent,
but also from yourself. rm * in the wrong directory is a
great example of that.
|
ball
|
|
response 60 of 122:
|
Dec 21 03:22 UTC 2006 |
It also provides more protection from a userland application
that loses its mind.
|
keesan
|
|
response 61 of 122:
|
Dec 21 04:18 UTC 2006 |
But I have an identical computer next to this one linked by ethernet cable.
And I could also just copy everything to another partition here. It is a 10GB
drive and my linux fits fine in 1GB or less. I keep what I have compiled at
a shell account.
|
ball
|
|
response 62 of 122:
|
Dec 21 05:03 UTC 2006 |
If they're separate partitions on the same disk, or even
seperate disk drives connected to the same computer, then
they provide no significant redundancy (since an errant
program, run as root can simply erase all connected disks).
Having an identical computer connected via a network cable
is a handy thing (I do something similar myself), but if
they're running the same system software, they're going to
share any vulnerabilities that it has. In your case
replacing the data may be trivial, but for most people that
is probably not the case. Besides, isn't it a bit like
saying "I don't lock my front door because I have home-
owner's insurance"?
|
maus
|
|
response 63 of 122:
|
Dec 21 05:05 UTC 2006 |
Keesan, I have fat fingered a single "." into "..". The guy who hired me
at my current job has still never lived down a "chmod -R 600 .." instead
of "chmod -R 600 .", which made everything in the entire machine
unreadable by anyone except root and unexecutable by anyone including
root. Had he been running as his normal login, he would have done very
little damage, but because he was using the root login, he and a
colleague wound up having to reimage the server and restore settings and
data from backup, which is a royal P.I.T.A.
|
cross
|
|
response 64 of 122:
|
Dec 21 14:15 UTC 2006 |
Sindi, you can do what you want. But like I said, it might bite you in the
ass. If you don't care, then great, I really have *no* interest in trying
to convince you otherwise, but it is bad form.
|
keesan
|
|
response 65 of 122:
|
Dec 21 16:38 UTC 2006 |
Most of what I do in linux is not doable by user. The only damage I have done
is crashing things, and e2fsck fixed it all but once (when I think the drive
was bad). I read email and browse mostly in DOS (kermit, lynx, pine). And
replacing the contents of a house is a lot different from copying software
between computers, which I do every time I change drives anyway.
I don't want to have to change write permissions on a bunch of directories,
or write only to one directory with subdirectories, wastes time.
I discovered iwlist (on the card that supports it) shows 8 available
connections. I need to compile a newer pcmcia module for the other card to
work with iwconfig. I have the source code. Do I uncompress it into the
pcmcia source code directory and make all again? Can I make just the one
module and if so how? I think udhcpc (a small dhcpc) can choose between
connections by address with -r .
|
ball
|
|
response 66 of 122:
|
Dec 21 18:11 UTC 2006 |
I live inside my computer ;-)
|
gull
|
|
response 67 of 122:
|
Dec 21 18:43 UTC 2006 |
Re resp:56: I learned not to run as root when I accidentally typed "rm
-rf /usr" instead of "rm -rf ~/usr".
|
remmers
|
|
response 68 of 122:
|
Dec 21 19:04 UTC 2006 |
I would be extremely nervous to run as root all the time. On modern Unix
and Linux systems, I find that the "sudo" command provides a rational
middle ground, providing reasonable protection against unfortunate
accidents while not requiring a full-blown root login every time I want to
do something requiring administrative privileges.
|
cross
|
|
response 69 of 122:
|
Dec 21 19:21 UTC 2006 |
Sudo has a lot of advantages: among them, it logs commands via syslog. So
if someone does something mistakenly, there is at least a lot which one can
look at to see what happened.
|