Re: Another system management tool to disappear.
On Sunday 30 August 2015 04:47:10 Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:30:58 -0400
>
> Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> wrote:
> > On Saturday 29 August 2015 10:39:07 Reco wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 09:49:55 -0400
> > >
> > > Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> wrote:
> > > > > > If su goes away, IMNSHO, it will be such a PITA that it will
> > > > > > encourage far more people to just give up and run their
> > > > > > machines as root full time. And I don't believe for a
> > > > > > millisecond that is the effect intended.
> > > > >
> > > > > They provide some systemd-specific kludge instead of su. So
> > > > > it's not that bad.
> > > >
> > > > I don't recall recognizing that being discussed yet.
> > >
> > > Please read the bugreport. It's all there.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/825
> > >
> > > > > And, given the current systemd adoption rate in Debian, I'd
> > > > > say that we, stable users, have 3-4 years before that
> > > > > "machinectl login" thing will be available to us.
> > > > >
> > > > > > So, if su goes away, how do I accomplish those tasks in a
> > > > > > suitable manner that will not bore a hole in the user
> > > > > > sandbox?
> > > > >
> > > > > If it comes to this (i.e 'su' will go away) - I just use
> > > > > busybox (which has perfectly working implementation of su
> > > > > without the fancy bits). I.e.
> > > > >
> > > > > busybox su -
> > > >
> > > > Command not found. Wheezy 32 bit install.
> > >
> > > Obviously for this command to work it's required to install
> > > busybox. I'd recommend busybox-static package.
> > >
> > > Reco
> >
> > Installed it, suid problems:
> >
> > gene@coyote:~$ busybox su amanda
> > su: must be suid to work properly
> > gene@coyote:~$ busybox su -
> > su: must be suid to work properly
> >
> > Is it still finding the system su first?
>
> No. The 'problem' is exactly what it tolds. Meaning:
>
> 1) "Original" su is suid root-owned binary:
>
> $ ls -la /bin/su
> -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 40168 Nov 21 2014 /bin/su
>
> 2) Busybox, on the other hand - is not:
>
> $ ls -la /bin/busybox
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1837008 Feb 19 2015 /bin/busybox
>
>
> So, *root*-invoked "busybox su" should behave exactly like original
> "su". Everyone other than root are told to get lost.
>
> Note that:
>
> 1) Setting suid bit on busybox is *extremely* bad idea. Don't do it
> ever do it (as busybox provides *much* more than su).
>
> 2) Your way of using su you've described should not be affected by
> this little inconvinience as you become root first, and do su second.
>
> Reco
So to me, nothing changes. Thats good IMO.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
Reply to: