Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 16:16:25 +0100 From: j mckitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> Cc: "Christopher S. Weimann" <cweimann@wallnet.com>, Olaf Hoyer <ohoyer@fbwi.fh-wilhelmshaven.de>, David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why I Don't Do Linux Message-ID: <20000815161625.B38878@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <20000210185747.G17536@fw.wintelcom.net>; from bright@wintelcom.net on Thu, Feb 10, 2000 at 06:57:48PM -0800 References: <v04220807b4c8f064200f@[10.0.0.20]> <4.1.20000211014526.00cc8730@mail.rz.fh-wilhelmshaven.de> <20000210212329.A4718@wallnet.com> <20000210185747.G17536@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
| > However, occasionally the rulers do tell someone. Under the usual | > `su' mechanism, once someone learns the root password who sympathizes | > with the ordinary users, he or she can tell the rest. The "wheel | > group" feature would make this impossible, and thus cement the power of | > the rulers. | > | > I'm on the side of the masses, not that of the rulers. If you are | > used to supporting the bosses and sysadmins in whatever they do, you | > might find this idea strange at first. | > | | Or any kind of accountability... How does the wheel group enforce accountability? Doesn't disabling remote root logins (thus requiring 'su) produce an audit trial, thus enforcing accountability? jm -- o-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-o | ~~~~~~~~~~~ jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org ~~~~~~~~~~~ | | "I prefer the term 'Artificial Person' myself." | o-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-o To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000815161625.B38878>