| 1 |
On Sunday 28 February 2010 23:27:57 William Hubbs wrote: |
| 2 |
> > 7 years ago a veteran Linux user taught me to always use su - for the |
| 3 |
> > very reason you stated. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Actually, you are safe with either "su -" (without sudo) or "sudo -i". |
| 7 |
> "sudo su -" is chaining "su -" on top of sudo, and is redundant because |
| 8 |
> "sudo -i" and "su -" do the same thing afaik. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
"sudo su" and "su" have a fundamental difference, vital in corporate networks: |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The former uses the user's password for authentication and sudoers for |
| 13 |
authorization. The latter uses knowledge of the root password for |
| 14 |
authorization and authentication. See my other post in this thread. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
On the work servers I enforce "sudo su" |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
OTOH, "sudo su" is indeed pretty pointless on a single-user machine. I never |
| 19 |
bother with sudo on this gentoo notebook for instance. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives