Re: List of "user-level" root commands?

From: Paul Smith (pausmith_at_nortelnetworks.com)
Date: 10/09/03

  • Next message: Hal Burgiss: "Re: Virus protection"
    To: redhat-list@redhat.com
    Date: 09 Oct 2003 12:40:39 -0400
    
    

    %% Paul Barclay <paul.barclay@digitalbridges.com> writes:

      pb> I would not restrict usage on any individual system, this will
      pb> just lead to frustration on the developers part.

    Well, this is not actually the conversation I want to have: I'm hoping
    someone can provide input on my original question...?

    However, FWIW, the decision has not been made and I'm still arguing for
    significantly looser restrictions (like sudo shell or something). But,
    if that doesn't fly I'd prefer to have a backup people could live with
    rather than having no access at all. There's no question this will lead
    to frustration but avoiding frustration is not necessarily the primary
    motivation behind these decisions...

      pb> What are you trying to protect on individual systems?

    Well, IS cares whether people screw around with their systems because
    they have to support it, and the further away from the "standard
    deployment" any given desktop is, the more time it takes to support, and
    TIME == $$. But, I don't think this is that big of a deal and if that
    were all we had to worry about this would not be an issue.

    No one is trying to protect anything on individual systems. But, we
    have a heavily networked environment with massive uses of NFS: virtually
    anything of any importance, from developer workspaces right over to
    peoples' home directories, is accessed through NFS.

    Allowing root on desktops gives users with that access almost unlimited
    power on NFS filesystems and there's absolutely no way to avoid it
    (except not using NFS which is not feasible). There is also no way to
    track who might have performed any malicious action. This is a real and
    serious security consideration.

      pb> Consider a Windows solution instead as they are quite up on
      pb> resticting user activities.

    It's funny you should mention this because one of my primary arguments
    for root on the desktop is that all our Windows users have Windows
    Administrator privileges on their desktop Windows boxes.

    However, Administrator privileges on a Windows system gives you
    _significantly_ less power than root on a UNIX system (of any type), in
    an NFS environment especially. Windows Administrator users can always
    only impact their own system. If there were an equivalent level of
    access in UNIX that would be good, but there isn't, so here we are.

    Of course, we all know (as do the security folks) that denying root
    access to users is futile: since we don't restrict physical access to
    our desktops and network ports it would be the work of but a few seconds
    for any user who _wanted_ to, to get root on a UNIX box on the network.

    However, there's an issue of liability and legal responsibility: if you
    can show you used a due diligence and made an honest effort to keep
    people out, as opposed to handing out the keys to everyone, you're in
    much better shape should anything actually happen.

    Anyway, all of this is really beside the point: I'm just trying to find
    out if anyone's collected any list of "reasonable" root-level commands
    that users would legitimately need to run on a day-to-day basis. Some
    obvious ones I can think of are mount and umount, for example. Also
    probably lsmod, insmod, rmmod (for our development). I think rpm would
    be very important. Some command to allow people to manage their X setup
    (screen resolution, etc.) Etc.

    -- 
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Paul D. Smith <psmith@nortelnetworks.com>   HASMAT--HA Software Mthds & Tools
     "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
    -- 
    redhat-list mailing list
    unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@redhat.com?subject=unsubscribe
    https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
    

  • Next message: Hal Burgiss: "Re: Virus protection"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: Sorry SUSE: Its been fun, but...
      ... No I don't think I did but that's about what the developers seem to be ... I don't see any benefit to giving root and the single user the ... Linux easier for Windows users to make the switch. ...
      (alt.os.linux.suse)
    • Re: Of mice and men
      ... >> This is no different to many environments OS - even windows. ... With their own account, and guest accounts set ... > root password, but they cannot "run as root" without it. ... > it will tell you that you do not have disk access. ...
      (comp.lang.cobol)
    • Re:Deploring *nix Philosophy
      ... > our different understanding of 'Desktop Installation'. ... > accounts for different family members and root account is managed by the ... initially invest in a fedora bible of sorts. ... bring the complexity or power of the OS down to the level of a windows ...
      (Fedora)
    • Re: New To Linux
      ... A file can be user root and group root, but when yo uhave a look you will ... The concept behind Linux IS confusing for someone accustomed to windows, ... execute, delete). ... In windows you are always an Administrator unless you use explicitely the ...
      (alt.os.linux.suse)
    • Re: Does Scandisk MSG indicate Hardware, Application, or OS Issue? - R
      ... Windows 2000 SP4, ... I had a problem that I am trying to determine the root cause of a problem. ... A disk check has been scheduled. ... After this restore it complained ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.file_system)