324
Systemd wants to expand to include a sudo replacement
(outpost.fosspost.org)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
Agreed, this is a nice inclusion. I also hate sudoers with a passion - I already use
doas
but it's not standard (in the Linux world anyway), but with systemd providing an alternative means that it'll become a standard which most distros would adopt, and I hope this means we can finally ditch the convoluted sudoers file once and for all.The thing with this is: its just a symlink to the
systemd-run
binary, which talks to PID1 to spawn new processes (in separate cgroups IIRC). Its one of the most fundamental parts of systemd. Even the debiansystemd
package includessystemd-run
.I guess the other question is if some tools the distro provides might switch to supporting it by default. For example on Arch there is
makepkg
that should never be executed as root, but does internally call some things with elevated privileges (mostlypacman
to install and remove packages). Currently it checks forsudo
and if not falls back tosu
, but maybe it might be worth considering changingsu
forrun0
if its guaranteed to be there.it does its authorization with polkit (which IIRC defaults to allow all
wheel
group members) and giving users that shouldn't be allowed root access, root access, is not something you ever want. This is usually referred to as unauthorized privilege escalation. Also, it isn't likesudo
doesn't need configuration.How does doas differ from sudo?
Never heard of the former until now.
doas
is quite popular in the BSD world, and was ported to Linux a few years ago (via the OpenDoas project).For starters, it's is a lot smaller than sudo - under 2k lines of code vs sudo's 132k - this makes it lot more easier to audit and maintain, and technically less likely to have vulnerabilities.
Another security advantage is that
doas
doesn't pass on the environment variables by default (you'd have to explicitly declare the ones you want to pass, which you can do so in the config).The config is also a lot simpler, and doesn't force you to use
visudo
- which never made sense to me,visudo
should've just generated the actual config, instead of checking it after the fact. Kinda like howgrubby
orgrub2-mkconfig
works. But no need for that complexity with doas.Eg, the most basic
doas
config could just have one line in the file:permit: wheel
. Maybe have another line for programs you want to run without a password, likepermit nopass dexter cmd pacman
.Awesome. Thanks for the insight.
Essentially functionally stripped sudo, smaller in size than sudo. See also Pottering's thoughts about the ecosystem
Nice to see that Mastodon has the same problem as Twitter with people trying to use it for long-form blog posts for some godforsaken reason.
Makes sense considering people who moved from one micro-blogging service to another instead of giving up on the idea completely are probably the ones deeply committed to that flawed idea.
Blame the Mastodon team, if you're not running a fork, you have to go into the source and adjust the character limit manually.
Nobody has to do it like this, Mastodon supports longer posts since other servers and clients support more, it's seemingly just a choice from upstream.
I admit, I’m not a big fan of putting more functionality into systemd (or just of systemd in general), but that is a well-reasoned argument for having sudo live in the init system.