Timeline for Negatives/downsides of Ubuntu's no-root sudo setup
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 22, 2011 at 9:27 | comment | added | polemon | @Shadur: The idea is, to deactivate root login alltogether. Of course, the wheel groups is supposed to be equal to root, to supply an elegant way of having more than one equal root admin. | |
| Mar 21, 2011 at 20:31 | comment | added | KeithB | OS X does indeed come this way (no root account) by default. I haven't noticed any drawbacks to having it setup this way. | |
| Mar 20, 2011 at 22:00 | comment | added | Shadur-don't-feed-the-AI | Giving unrestricted sudo access is not in fact more secure than giving out the root password, seeing as how anyone with that level of access can just sudo passwd and lock everyone else out. As always, the weak link in security is between chair and keyboard. | |
| Mar 20, 2011 at 21:43 | comment | added | J. Taylor | I understand that sudo is not a new invention, but the way that Ubuntu uses it (i.e. to remove the root account altogether) is certainly unusual, when compared to other distros. | |
| Mar 20, 2011 at 21:40 | comment | added | polemon | sudo is not a new invetion, it's been there for years. Maybe Ubuntu has something even different in mind, or simply tries to copy Windows behaviour. | |
| Mar 20, 2011 at 21:32 | comment | added | J. Taylor | Yes -- this is what I used to do when I was running Gentoo. But if the best way to give regular users full access to root is to place them in wheel + sudoers, then I don't understand why they wouldn't just want to set up sudo-root by default, and then let them create a root account manually if they actually need a root login. | |
| Mar 20, 2011 at 21:14 | comment | added | polemon | in case more people need root access to a machine, this is by all means the advisable way, instead of giving more people the root password. | |
| Mar 20, 2011 at 21:12 | history | answered | polemon | CC BY-SA 2.5 |