[Full-disclosure] Ubuntu 11.10 now unsecure by default

[Dan Kaminsky]

What is the security differential between su and sudo bash?

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 19, 2011, at 6:15 AM, james at zero-internet.org.uk wrote:

> I'll second that; the isp I work at has a sizeable ubuntu customer base and these are customers who have made an informed decision.
> 
> Now; let's consider ubuntu's inherited security from debian such as configuring a 'mortal account' (admittedly can be ignored in the preseed) and then the lack of perms on su; must use sudo.
> 
> This is a distro that is newbie friendly but is not designed specifically for them.
> 
> Unfortunately, though, you make a distro with simplified tasks (printer installation a fantastic example) and people, especially long term linuxers- though I ought to be included I guess, remember back all too easily to when everything was an uphill struggle: "what do you mean I don't have to compile this as a flipping module? That's not freedom!" Being all too familiar.
> 
> Just my tuppence worth anyway.
> 
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johan Nestaas <johannestaas at gmail.com>
> Sender: full-disclosure-bounces at lists.grok.org.uk
> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 12:04:46 
> To: Olivier<feuille at bibibox.fr>
> Cc: <full-disclosure at lists.grok.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Full-disclosure] Ubuntu 11.10 now unsecure by default
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/