I hope I am on-topic enough to entwine my question with questions of the OP, so that the responses to my own add to both his/her and my own clarity.
As a beginner, I can only see that sudo is conventient but seems to add a security risk. Afterall, when the password of the ordinary user with sudo privileges is compromised, immediately allows the attacker to perform root-privileged commands, whereas if the ordinary user does not have sudo privileges, his compromised account cannot utilise sudo so as to execute root-privileged commands. I would rather go through the trouble to execute the su command than use sudo.
To me it seems that sudo or the doas alternative cancel out the security benefit of privilege-hierarchy.
And: What would be the significant difference between su and su -?
As a beginner, I can only see that sudo is conventient but seems to add a security risk. Afterall, when the password of the ordinary user with sudo privileges is compromised, immediately allows the attacker to perform root-privileged commands, whereas if the ordinary user does not have sudo privileges, his compromised account cannot utilise sudo so as to execute root-privileged commands. I would rather go through the trouble to execute the su command than use sudo.
To me it seems that sudo or the doas alternative cancel out the security benefit of privilege-hierarchy.
And: What would be the significant difference between su and su -?
Sincerely,
cellSeven
cellSeven
Statistics: Posted by cellSeven — 2024-04-10 10:59
