Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:22:12 -0700 From: Tom Vilot <tom@vilot.com> To: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: bash - superuser Message-ID: <41C6EE24.4080606@vilot.com> In-Reply-To: <20041220145227.GA24495@ei.bzerk.org> References: <41C6AC75.6020608@uol.com.br> <20041220120620.GA68520@duplo.dahoam> <20041220133252.GB7774@lb.tenfour> <20041220145227.GA24495@ei.bzerk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Using a shell not contained in the root filesystem can cause problems >even when not in single user mode. There are enough examples in the archives. > > Admittedly, I'm still a bit of a noob, but I can't stand any shell but bash. >>I really don't get what the problem is with this 'sh is on the root' argument. >>Using bash is a lot more productive for many people, so why not let them use it? >> >> > >No problem for people to be productive with bash or whatever shell they >prefer. Just not for root. You should not even use the root account unless >absolutely necessary. > Ya mean like ... ... editing /etc/rc.conf ... installing a port or package ... updating the ports tree and/or running portupgrade ... configuring the firewall ... backing up the file system ... checking /var/log files for attempts at cracking ... reading root's email ... rsyncing to a remote server I would be curious how I could do any of the above as someone other than root.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41C6EE24.4080606>