>OSX has multiple levels of user permissions. Think of the OS as a >tree. The "root" is, well, the roots of the tree. Some actions can >only be taken at the "root" level. The root user has complete root >access.
You mean the system kernel? Linux,Mac and Unix has this but not windows.
>There is only one "root" user and this user does not exist by >default. Every "admin" user has access to root powers, but only >indirectly and only if the root does not exist. For the root to >exist, you have to "enable" it. Think of the root user a potential >single point of ultimate authority. Once the root user is enabled, >the root can override anything and nothing can override the root.
Why does windows not use this but Linux,Mac and Unix do?
>Most users don't know about the root user because normal use of the >OSX does not require root access. Even "power users" never resort >to enabling or logging in as a root user. There is a command-line >function ("sudo") that provides "super-user" access at the command >line without enabling the root user.
Is this some thing Linux,Mac and Unix set up to make it more secure this way than windows that is full admin by default.
>In roughly 15 years administering Macs, I have logged in as root >twice to "crack" an admin user on systems where the admin password >was lost. Even in those cases I'm not sure that operating as the >root user was necessary. ;)
Do you not need a passward for root ?
>I believe there are two reasons to enable the root. One is to >secure the system at the deepest level. The other is to operate >directly on the OS itself with total authority without resorting to >work arounds such as the sudo command.
No comments:
Post a Comment