Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 25 Apr 2001 09:41:58 -0400 | From | "Mohammad A. Haque" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Single user linux |
| |
imel96@trustix.co.id wrote: > for those who didn't read that patch, i #define capable(), > suser(), and fsuser() to 1. the implication is all users > will have root capabilities.
And this is better than just having the system auto-login as root because......?
> > then i tried to bring up the single user thing to hear > opinions (not flames). and by that, i actually didn't mean > to have users share the same uid/gid 0. i know somebody > will need to differentiate user. > > so when everybody suggested playing with login, getty, etc. > i know you have got the wrong idea. if i wanted to play > on user space, i'd rather use capset() to set all users > capability to "all cap". that's the perfect equivalent. > > so the user space solution (capset()) works, but then came > the idea to optimize away. that's what blow everybody up. > don't get me wrong, i always agree with rik farrow when he > wrote in ;login: that we should build software with security > in mind. > > but i also hate bloat. lets not go to arm devices, how about > a notebook. it's a personal thing, naturally to people who > doesn't know about computer, personal doesn't go with multi > user. by that i mean user with different capabilities, not > different persons. >
So don't install any services. The security in the kernel is not even bloat compared to some of the cruft that you can just not install.
> - with that patch, people will still have authentication. > so ssh for example, will still prevent illegal access, if > you had an exploit you're screwed up anyway. > sure httpd will give permission to everybody to browse > a computer, but i don't think a notebook need to run it.
See above.
> > so i guess i deserve opinions instead of flames. the > approach is from personal use, not the usual server use. > if you think a server setup is best for all use just say so, > i'm listening.
I have Linux on my PowerBook. I don't have sendmail, httpd, mysql, and a billion other 'server' processes running. Does that still make it a server?
We're not flaming (well some of us anyways). Just pointing out (loudly) where your thinking is flawed.
> nah, performance was never my consideration. i do save about > 3kb from my zImage, but i'm not interested.
But you just said you hate bloat. What other reason do you have for hating bloat?
--
===================================================================== Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/ mhaque@haque.net
"Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Project Lead Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/ batmanppc@themes.org ===================================================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |