[Off Topic] Re: Linux security

[Daniel Carrera]

Jim Richardson wrote:
> That's not the default, if it was the default, you wouldn't need the -f
> flag. you *told* it to not bother you with questions, to just do it. 
> 
> Since the shell has been "hidden" behind a couple of menus now, it's not
> something that the newbie is likely to see, without someone pointing it
> out. Much like OSX. With much the same mechanism (OSX also uses a sudo
> model)  

Correct. To expand on that, I think the shell is more hidden than just 
behind a couple of menus. I can't find it on *any* menu anywhere. The 
only way to run it is to already know the command for it and either use 
the "run program" option or add a panel entry. That alone makes it 
unlikely that a naive user would ever see a terminal.

Perfect security is impossible. A good security model makes it easier 
for the user act in a way that is secure and requires extra work to act 
in a way that is insecure. A bad security model does the opposite. For 
more on this, read "Beyond Fear" by Bruce Schneier or read his blog.

Cheers,
Daniel.
-- 
      /\/`) http://opendocumentfellowship.org
     /\/_/
    /\/_/   ...and starting today, all passwords must
    \/_/    contain letters, numbers, doodles, sign
    /       language and squirrel noises.