1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 00:32 on Monday 11 April 2011, Mark Shields |
2 |
did opine thusly: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Alan McKinnon |
5 |
<alan.mckinnon@×××××.com>wrote: |
6 |
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 16:28 on Sunday 10 April 2011, Dale did |
7 |
> > opine |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > thusly: |
10 |
> > > > That was it! I've now got su-ability from that normal user. |
11 |
> > > > |
12 |
> > > > Funny, though, on my (very) old Debian system I don't seem to have a |
13 |
> > > > wheel. |
14 |
> > > > |
15 |
> > > > Thanks. |
16 |
> > > > |
17 |
> > > >> Best regards, |
18 |
> > > >> Yann |
19 |
> > > |
20 |
> > > I think that is a Gentoo thing. It does add some security if you don't |
21 |
> > > want a user, like maybe some little kid, getting root access for any |
22 |
> > > reason. |
23 |
> > |
24 |
> > No, it's pretty standard across Unix. |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> > The BSD's for example have had it since forever - members of the wheel |
27 |
> > group |
28 |
> > being allowed to sudo anything only came along much later. |
29 |
> > |
30 |
> > Leaving it *out* is a Linux-distro thing, probably from the usual usage |
31 |
> > case |
32 |
> > for Linux for many years - a server on the web that actually only had one |
33 |
> > user |
34 |
> > even though it was capable of being fully multi-user. The concept of |
35 |
> > wheel for |
36 |
> > su is pretty redundant in that case. |
37 |
> > |
38 |
> > |
39 |
> > -- |
40 |
> > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
41 |
> |
42 |
> Wheel has nothing to do with su; it has everything to do with sudo, but |
43 |
> only if /etc/sudoers is edited to allow the Wheel group sudo access. Su |
44 |
> is for changing to a different user, or running a command as another user; |
45 |
> doing either requires the password of that user; sudo, on the other hand, |
46 |
> only requires your password, if you're in the wheel group and the wheel |
47 |
> group is given full sudo access, and the sudo access for wheel requires |
48 |
> your password. |
49 |
> |
50 |
> Some examples, assuming your user (the one you're logged in as) is in wheel |
51 |
> and requires a password for sudo access (see: visudo): |
52 |
> |
53 |
> sudo su <--- escalates you to root user with your own password. This is |
54 |
> running "su" with "sudo". |
55 |
> su user <--- switches to "user" with their password required to be entered |
56 |
> sudo su user < -- switch to "user" with your password required to be |
57 |
> entered sudo <command> <-- runs command as root |
58 |
> sudo -u user <command> <--- runs command as "user" |
59 |
> sudo su - user <--- escalates you to "user" and cd's to their home |
60 |
> directory |
61 |
> |
62 |
> Please read the man pages for sudo and su for more info. |
63 |
|
64 |
Mark, |
65 |
|
66 |
You know better than that. Re-read my post, I said that *Unix*, most |
67 |
especially the BSDs, have had a concept of wheel for, well, since almost when |
68 |
Unix started. sudo came much later and for sudo, wheel is naturally a very |
69 |
useful pre-existing thing to use. |
70 |
|
71 |
If Linux distros, maintainers or the GNU folk chose to not implement wheel |
72 |
membership as a prerequisite for su, then that's fine. They can do what they |
73 |
want with their stuff but it doesn't change the fact that other operating |
74 |
systems can, and do, do it differently. |
75 |
|
76 |
I have read man su and man sudo. Many times. I see that the ones I have are |
77 |
very Linux-centric. |
78 |
|
79 |
Google "wheel su" for more info, keeping in mind that Linux != Unix |
80 |
|
81 |
|
82 |
|
83 |
|
84 |
-- |
85 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |