From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 3 10:44:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAEB316A4CE for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:44:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mta09-svc.ntlworld.com (mta09-svc.ntlworld.com [62.253.162.49]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 367E743D3F for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 10:44:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mark@markdnet.demon.co.uk) Received: from [80.6.110.132] by mta09-svc.ntlworld.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.37 201-229-121-137-20020806) with ESMTP id <20041003103927.IPYR1100.mta09-svc.ntlworld.com@[80.6.110.132]>; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:39:27 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20041002102918.W22102@fw.reifenberger.com> References: <20041002081928.GA21439@gothmog.gr> <20041002102918.W22102@fw.reifenberger.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <6053756A-1528-11D9-BECB-000A95C1B5C0@markdnet.demon.co.uk> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Mark Dixon Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:38:34 +0100 To: Michael Reifenberger X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 1.0.1 (v33, 10.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619) cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Protection from the dreaded "rm -fr /" X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 10:44:39 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2 Oct 2004, at 09:34, Michael Reifenberger wrote: > This does only help for the obvious case of '/' but not for the > './' and '../' or '../../' ... accidents. > > Furthermore does it prevent root from doing `rm -rf /` which is a > pretty > legal operation for root since he knows what he is doing. > > This is UNIX, not Windows. > I agree, this is not a route we want to go down. root should be able to do whatever they want, no questions asked. If you put in protections to prevent root doing 'silly' things, it will simply encourage admins to be root when they probably shouldn't Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin) iD8DBQFBX9ayLqgJ90OcaiARAu0pAKDv9Hc6bQl9xi8N5OOXIaG3o6zzjgCfeC3G 60/slkjUAZ1+bALuUVT0GJQ= =LCcS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----