Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Sat 19th Jul 2008 19:01 UTC, submitted by cypress
Linux Linux and UNIX-like operating systems in general are regarded as being more secure for the common user, in contrast with operating systems that have "Windows" as part of their name. Why is that? When entering a dispute on the subject with a Windows user, the most common argument he tries to feed me is that Windows is more widespread, and therefore, more vulnerable. Apart from amusing myths like "Linux is only for servers" or "does it have a word processor?", the issue of Linux desktop security is still seriously misunderstood.
Thread beginning with comment 323747
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Yeah But... How long before
by WereCatf on Sun 20th Jul 2008 11:59 UTC in reply to "Yeah But... How long before"
Member since:

Here is a great gaping security hole.
Personally, I think using 'sudo' without a password is plain crazy and actually go that on step further on all my Linux boxes and disable it completely.

This is something I totally agree with. sudo without a password is essentially the same as running as root. Any virus/malware/hacker etc can do anything they want on your *buntu installation as long as they can run sudo. It might be user-friendly..but it sure as hell ain't secure.

When I was using Gentoo I configured sudo to require password for everything except a few predefined commands, and I'm glad that Mandriva does also require password when you're trying to use sudo.

Reply Parent Score: 2

-oblio- Member since:

Dude, Ubuntu's sudo requires a password - the user's password - before doing anything.

Have you ever used Ubuntu, as the posters before me would say? ;)

# Uncomment to allow members of group sudo to not need a password

As you can see, it's commented out, so by default it DOES require a password.

Reply Parent Score: 5