On Thu, 2003-06-12 at 14:02, Shawn wrote: > Why are they developing apps that require root priviledges/file > ownership I don't know. I've tried explaining numerous times to > various people, and I keep getting the "because it needs it" > explanation. Something about the way it ties into the system IIRC. > It runs as a non root user, so why does it require this? I can understand if a program needs root priviliges (though they should probably look at what priviliges they can drop as the application runs, or the application might be able to switch user after it initializes), but there's no good reason the configuration files, source files, etc. need to be owned by root -- they just need to be readable and writable. > They also need sudo to run builds and do compiles supposedly. I've > looked at the sudo log, and can't really see a validity to these > claims. That's a whole world of bad... Looks to me like you need to exercise your BOFH skills. Find a good LART and have a nice long visit. These developers aren't thinking hard enough. There might be a few reasons to let them do a few things with sudo, but not all of this stuff you're describing. -- _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ I got a garage door opener. / \/ \(_)| ' // ._\ / - \(_)/ ./| ' /(__ It can't close. Just open. \_||_/|_||_|_\\___/ \_-_/|_|\__\|_|_\ __) [ Mike Hicks | http://umn.edu/~hick0088/ | mailto:hick0088 at tc.umn.edu ] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20030613/608b4f20/attachment.pgp