| 1 |
On 10/25/22 9:04 PM, Ramon Fischer wrote: |
| 2 |
> I do not think, that this is a bug, since it is the default file, which |
| 3 |
> should not be edited by the user. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I *STRONGLY* /OBJECT/ to the notion that users should not edit |
| 6 |
configuration files. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
By design, that's the very purpose of the configuration file, for users |
| 9 |
to edit them to be what they want them to be. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
The concept of "don't edit configuration files" seems diametrically |
| 12 |
opposed to the idea of Gentoo as I understand it. Namely, /you/ build |
| 13 |
/your/ system to behave the way that /you/ want it to. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> All changes should be done in "/etc/sudoers.d/" to avoid such cases. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Then why in the world does the /default/ file, as installed by Gentoo, |
| 18 |
include directions to edit the the file?!?!?! |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Aside: Someone recently posted a comment to the sudo users mailing list |
| 21 |
(exact name escapes me) wherein their security policy prohibited |
| 22 |
@includedir explicitly because of the capability that adding a file to |
| 23 |
such included directories inherently enabled sudo access -or- caused |
| 24 |
sudo to fail secure and perform a Denial of Service. They were required |
| 25 |
to use individual @include directives. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
IMHO telling a Gentoo user not to modify a file in /etc takes hutzpah. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Grant. . . . |
| 33 |
unix || die |
Archives