| 1 |
just security problem. server should not be that easy to be interrupted! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
在2015年03月23日 17:46，Peter Humphrey 写道: |
| 5 |
On Sunday 22 March 2015 14:36:36 Jc García wrote: |
| 6 |
> 2015-03-22 4:30 GMT-06:00 Peter Humphrey <peter@××××××××××××.uk>: |
| 7 |
> > On Saturday 21 March 2015 16:20:17 Jc García wrote: |
| 8 |
> >> > Interesting. But as I said ealier, I can reboot the system when I am |
| 9 |
> >> > a |
| 10 |
> >> > user by Ctrl+Alt+Delete. The user can reboot the system, but can't |
| 11 |
> >> > shut |
| 12 |
> >> > down? Strange |
| 13 |
> >> |
| 14 |
> >> It's not strange, `man 2 reboot`. It's a defined behavior. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > I'm with German here. Being designed that way doesn't stop it being |
| 17 |
> > strange. |
| 18 |
> I see it as a last resource available for rebooting under any |
| 19 |
> circumstances( Similar to what you can do with Sysrq). |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> > Consider: I'm an ordinary user sitting at a terminal. I'm not allowed to |
| 22 |
> > halt the machine, but I am allowed to reboot it into perhaps some quite |
| 23 |
> > other configuration. Or I can keep rebooting it over and again, |
| 24 |
> > effectively preventing the machine from doing its job. How does that |
| 25 |
> > make sense? |
| 26 |
> It doesn't and that's why it's configurable, if you are in a high |
| 27 |
> security requiring environment, you disable it. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The consensus seems to be that there's no point in trying to prevent a user |
| 30 |
from rebooting the machine, and I'm happy to go along with that. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
The remaining question is: why is the user not allowed to halt it? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Rgds |
| 36 |
Peter. |
Archives