On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:33 PM, dbneeley <dbneeley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > more efficiently than Linux/Unix, which will require some googling and
> > > studying to get the equivalent of some point and click stuff.
>
> First, Active Directory is not used on the vast majority of Windows systems. Second, it is far more difficult than the UNIX model--but may seem easier because of familiarity.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Is that not what Unix ,Linux and Mac do has no one runs has root user? Has it is too dangerous for a user ,program or any thing to run has a root user.
>
> Too many uses of "has" for me to make heads or tails of this question.
For Future reference (to help, either the original poster [OP], or the
reader), I think the OP is maybe not a native English speaker. Where
they are saying "has", they actually mean "as" on some occasions.
That sentence should have been, "Is that not what Unix, Linux, and Mac
do? Essentially have no one run as the root user? As is is too
dangerous for a user, program or anything to run as a root user...?"
That said, I think dbneeley's answer was on target of the question.
But that is for Rob to decide... My answer is just "Yes," as far as I
know. That is what they do, at least as far as Linux is concerned
(for most distributions). Some, such as Ubuntu, have the root user
account disabled by default. Most all distributions that I have tried
prompt the user during installation to set up a user account that is
not root. The philosphy is that if someone gains access to a computer
while a user is logged in, as long as they are not logged in as root,
the intruder (virus/hacker/etc.) will be limited in what they can
access and/or change.
I do know there are some minimalist distributions which have the root
user account as default (such as earliy versions of puppy linux), but
these were designed to be run from CD, rather that the hard drive.
No comments:
Post a Comment