Idea
#1448: Allow Root Login
|
| |
-764
|
|
|
Written by cembree the 29 Feb 08 at 14:42.
Category: Others.
Related to:
Nothing/Others.
Status: New
|
|
|
Description
I started my computer life on single user systems where I was essentially always root. AppleDOS, DOS, Windows 3.x, OS/2 all allowed me to control my system without sudo or su.
I understand the risks, I understand why some users should not be root. I understand I cannot use ubuntu without this feature.
Tags:
(none)
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
fletcherthunder wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 14:52
|
EDITOR = gedit sudo visudo
does this not work for what you're wanting?
|
|
oldcodger wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 14:56
| |
It's very easy to create a root account and password, but if you do not know already how to do this, you're asking for disaster. Running all the time as root is a very bad idea.
|
|
Cybercod wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 14:58
|
Its possible and even somewhat easy to run as root. You just have to know how.
And if you don't know how, you have no business running as root because you don't have a clue what you are doing.
|
|
pescez wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 15:00
|
it already can be done, but it neutralizes the reasons why ubuntu uses sudo.. i think.
$sudo passwd -u root ; sudo passwd root
enter your password and you can be root.
|
|
pescez wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 15:02
| |
i want to add that if you haven't been able to find how to do it... well you'd better leave things as they are.. use sudo...
|
|
therpandrus wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 15:21
| |
Now i know why there are so many Windows viruses. It's a mindset !!
|
|
adelie wrote on the 29 Feb 08 at 23:53
|
You can enable root login in the system options (somewhere), and it is a REALLY bad idea. The risk goes far beyond how a user will screw up their computer unnecessary, as if that wasn't bad enough.
It would be like driving around with an extra gas can in your lap while you drive, just in case you run out of gas, or always carrying a loaded pistol in your hand with the safety off. gas = good, guns = ...useful? But these are not appropriate 'just in case' ideas.
sudo is a constant reminder that at any time we can destroy everything on our machine if we are not responsible in its use.
Maybe we need to add a message to the terminal like in OSX, "With great power comes great responsibility. Use it wisely" (if I got it wrong, it is cause I am not a mac person)
|
|
neon wrote on the 4 Mar 08 at 22:06
|
Hahahaha.
You're an idiot.
|
|
noodlesgc wrote on the 18 Apr 08 at 18:36
| |
Congratulations. This is the most voted down idea yet. (Just search ideas, sort by votes, and leave search bar blank)
|
|
Manos wrote on the 6 May 08 at 20:04
|
@neon
This is a place of discussions, not insults.
He's not an idiot, he just is new to Linux.
@cembree
I know what you are thinking.
I was in the same situation, I tried telling Windows users to use a separate account for your everyday user.
Most of the people said it was a stupid idea.
The fact is, Linux's method to not login as root is the right direction for everyday security.
If you look a Windows Vista, you can see they are moving in the same direction.
Congrats on having the most demoted idea, even if 571 votes are from other ideas.
I have a feeling someone will beat you with an idea like "Charge Money for Ubuntu" or "Give Microsoft Money."
|
|
tbrminsanity wrote on the 6 May 08 at 20:42
| |
Not having a root account has built in security in itself and is the main reason there is no root account. That being said Ubuntu is not the only OS that does this, Mac OSX is the biggest example of an OS that doesn't have a root account, others include ReactOS (a windows clone) that with this security feature have eliminated 50% of the potential viruses that can effect Windows based OSs. Even back in the old desktop days of Windows 1.0, Atari OS, and Apple OS, there was Amiga OS which only gave users guest privileges until they took administrator power. The advantages of not having a root account far exceed the disadvantages and thus it will be a staple of Ubuntu.
|
|
Auzy wrote on the 7 May 08 at 01:22
| |
Actually, OSX DOES have a root account.. Its just not enabled by default, but you can enable it from CD
|
|
jpka wrote on the 7 Aug 08 at 17:51
|
+1
never do it by default.
But in many cases, such as:
- no internet connection and correspond risks such as personal data leakage;
- laboratory environment, for example computer used for HDD repair or often hdd-to-hdd rescue;
- one day installation, to test or show to friends -
I always need the option 'ALWAYS BE ONLY ROOT'. I extremely confusing without it, in listed cases.
|
|
droetker wrote on the 18 Aug 08 at 06:07
|
I don't understand this discussion all the time.
For those few who want to have a root login - what's the problem giving root a password with "sudo passwd"?
And all your problems seem gone...
*shaking head*
|
|
andrewhine99 wrote on the 15 Sep 08 at 22:22
|
I have no experience of Linux but decided to give it a go as an alternative to Windows. I installed it on an external USB drive attached to my laptop using GRUB as the boot manager. I can now set the boot sequence on my laptop to start GRUB from the USB drive and then select Windows or Ubuntu from the start menu. The point of this is that there is also a 'debug' option for Ubuntu which gives you the command prompt (sorry, I only know the Windows terminology). After logging in as root I entered the startx command which brought up the GUI. A warning appeared about being logged on as root, but then everything seemed to proceed normally.
I read that some people think this is dangerous, but I have used Windows as administrator for years and never brought the machine down. I tend agree with those that say you should be able to do what you want with your system. It is my own personal PC and the worst possible scenario is that I need to re-install. I've used the GUI as root for three weeks now without problems and not needed to use sudo once.
Can anybody think of problems with this approach (except for those who believe in the 'nanny state')
|
|
Auzy wrote on the 16 Sep 08 at 01:00
|
Andrewhine99. Same problem as what windows has, if firefox gets hacked, the hacker has unlimited access to your OS. Damage isn't just isolated to one user.
Its also interesting to note that Microsoft was using many mechanisms in the past, to make admin safer.
Finally, vista uses the equivilent of Policykit/sudo now anyway. There is no real need for root access. OSX for instance is so well designed, that I have only ever needed to enable root once, or even type sudo once (and that was caused by a bug in Leopard which made all admin accounts standard on startup).
|
|
andrewhine99 wrote on the 16 Sep 08 at 16:40
|
Auzy. I take your point about the internet but I thought there were few if any viruses for Linux. On the plus side I haven't managed to get my wireless network working yet, so Internet connection is via Windows.
As for Vista I dislike it intensely - the nanny syndrome gone mad. The first thing I did with my new laptop was to upgrade from Vista to XP. I wouldn't want Linux to go the same way.
|
|
Auzy wrote on the 17 Sep 08 at 00:11
|
Policykit is the same thing as UAC actually (and just as intrusive), but get the Digg/Slashdot idiot linux users, and they will start screaming about how crap UAC is. UAC disabled in Vista, Windows XP administrator mode and Root are the same thing, however, Windows XP had many tricks such as sandboxing to protect IE somewhat, we have none though.
Linux is just as vulnerable as Windows to viruses actually. Just because they aren't there now, doesn't mean they wont be. We are actually in a much worse position then windows with viruses, because if the linux firewall isn't working, there is no easy way for a user to notice on Linux, but on windows you will know because of the security centre. Because of reasons like that, assuming that both OS's had an equal marketshare, it would actually be easier to compromise linux these days and maintain access without being noticed.
In fact, the best thing we can do for linux is probably a security and stability centre, which would be significantly more modular and powerful then the windows version.
|
|
andrewhine99 wrote on the 18 Sep 08 at 21:17
| |
Auzy. Your proposals are very sensible. Let's hope they get implemented.
|
|
Aphoxema wrote on the 24 Sep 08 at 20:30
|
It is useful to log in as root, in some circumstances, but the sheer danger of it is ofter underrated by new users thinking they can 'just be careful', a mentality I'll admit I shared when I started on red hat about 10 years ago.
This in no way should be made any easier for a desktop user to practice.
|
|
BooBo wrote on the 29 Sep 08 at 10:52
| |
Congratulations on the least popular idea, ever.
|
|
lifestream wrote on the 13 Nov 08 at 16:16
|
You CAN run as root! It's as simple as installing Windows! Go back to it :D
I hope you have learned why not use a root account. But if not, I hope your PC gets infected and broken ;p
|
Post your comment
|
|
|
