root user

[AV3]

On Jan/1/2012 11:3227 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 1 January 2012 16:05, AV3<arvimide at earthlink.net>  wrote:
>> On Jan/1/2012 6:5435 AM, Earthson wrote:
>>>
>>> root is disabled, and it does not have a passwd. if you really want to
>>> use "root", just set a passwd for it.
>>>
>>> command:
>>
>> You can do this, but it is not a good idea. The major security advantage of
>> Unix OS's over Windows is afforded by their disabled root accounts
>> inaccessible to outside intruders. Keep it that way, unless you have a truly
>> compelling reason to risk your root account's security for.
>
> Whereas the principle is correct, this is *not* a general Unix thing,
> by any means. It was first introduced (that I am aware of) with Mac OS
> X and Ubuntu copied it in 2004 when it first appeared, but few other
> Linuxes do it, let alone Unixes.
>
> It's an Ubuntu peculiarity.
>
> However, the advice is sound: get used to not using root. ...
>


My mistake, deriving from the fact that I only use Mac OS and 
Ubuntu-on-a-Mac. I over-generalized from my limited experience. I 
thought that Unix was inherently more secure than Windows OS, whatever 
the reason. Am I wrong about that? Why so, if not disabled root accounts?


-- 
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++
||Arnold VICTOR, New York City, i. e., <arvimideQ at Wearthlink.net>    ||
||Arnoldo VIKTORO, Nov-jorkurbo, t. e., <arvimideQ at Wearthlink.net>   ||
||Remove capital letters from e-mail address for correct address/    ||
||    Forigu majusklajn literojn el e-poŝta adreso por ĝusta adreso  ||
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++