On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 02:31:32PM EST, Paul Johnson wrote: > cga2000 wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 06:37:01PM EST, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 06:28:05PM -0500, cga2000 wrote: > >> > > > >> > > Pardon my ignorance .. I do my best to stay away from gui apps .. > >> > > > >> Unfortunately, some things flat out require a GUI. > > > > Unfortunately? > > > > :-) > > Yes, this is the right word. GUIs frequently sacrifice security, > flexibility and functionality in favor of being relatively drool-proof. > Sacrificing security at the root level is never the brightest idea around.
Nicely put. > > I forget what's it called .. "synapsis" or something .. ? but another > > one that comes to mind is the GUI front-end to apt .. Wouldn't that need > > to run privileged for some of its functionalities (eg. install/remove > > software) .. ? > > kpackage can call su from within itself and prompt the user for password as > needed. Mind you, and this is not directly related to the above, I sometimes have this bizarre feeling that much of this awkwardness we have to deal with -- in X certainly .. but from the linux console as well, albeit to a lesser extent -- eventually boils down to the *NIX model not having been designed from the ground up with security in mind. I just cannot see why you should need something extreme such as root access to install/maintain software. Maybe that with some contortions this could be achieved within the *NIX security model by defining a privileged group and making sure software packaging takes this into account .. maybe not. Not for me to decide. :-) > > How's stuff like that supposed to work in a "strict" proof of concept > > GUI environment with no *term available -- ie. all you are allowed is > > an icon on your desktop and possibly an entry in your gnome/kde menus? > > Root gets the "failsafe" option for X by default? xterm is mandatory in an > X install, IIRC. Please refer to what Roberto has to say about pointy-head activity in the enterprise. In the enterprise world there is no guarantee that some dude will not decide at some point that it's his best interest that *term's are the devil's work and have them autdafe'd at the earliest opportunity. But I was talking "proof of concept" .. in the world of the average to-the-gui-born user .. and thinking in terms of CD/DVD's that you just pop in .. say "yes" to the eula .. click the "next" button a few time .. done.. Not likely _that_ crowd would like the idea of starting an xterm.. typing in a command to launch the installer .. etc. etc. As such I find the X gui model incomplete and although having gui installers assume you already have root authority prior to launching them may be a lesser evil than the proliferation of password-prompting code in the wrong places .. I'm rather convinced by Roberto's argumentation .. I find that it's just one more good reason why I'd rather stick to the non-gui interface. Thanks much for your comments .. food for thought .. enlightening .. Thanks. cga -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
