Re: It must be a troll

From	candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.misc
Subject	Re: It must be a troll
Date	2025-08-11 19:40 +0000
Organization	the-candyden-of-code
Message-ID	<slrn109khc1.eka.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <106v18s$38d7c$1@dont-email.me> <mfi84tF6praU1@mid.individual.net> <1071mfd$3s0qm$1@dont-email.me> <pan$27cea$5b94eb1$8c8db7d2$9bf84edb@linux.rocks> <0w7lQ.24790$mS6.18329@fx34.iad>

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Joel W. Crump <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote at 19:54 this Thursday (GMT):
> On 8/7/25 3:36 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Aug 2025 08:00:44 GMT, Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> 
>>> All these years, from my first Linux distro SLS (Softlanding Linux System) in 1992
>>>   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softlanding_Linux_System
>>> I have been root and never ever had a problem.
>> 
>> Of course.  Running as root is the only sensible option.
>> 
>> These security weirdos, if one were to ask them to explain,
>> in explicit technical detail, how a personal workstation
>> running root could ever be comprised, they could not ever
>> answer.
>> 
>> That's because they are technically stupid.  They understand
>> nothing.  All that they can do is parrot, or ape, the standard
>> line.
>> 
>> Heck.  I can train a monkey to shine my shoes but I sure
>> as fuck would not want that monkey to administer my GNU/Linux
>> machines.
>> 
>> As an example, I can mention Berkeley Packet Filter (BPF) and
>> those security buffoons wouldn't know what the fuck I am talking
>> about.  Yet BPF is a major security hole and a LOT of mitigations
>> are built around it -- but, for a personal workstation BPF is
>> totally superfluous and can be easily eliminated.
>> 
>> Other examples abound.
>> 
>> In conclusion, all those that, for a personal workstation, advocate
>> these common security "mitigations" are clueless idiots that
>> belong in the monkey cage at the local zoo.
>
>
> You're a fucking idiot, dude.  I don't even know a lot about Linux's 
> internals or anything, but I know that operating an Internet-connected 
> box as root is stupid, 99.999% of the time it'll be fine, you're right, 
> but do you want to take that chance?  To save typing "sudo" or whatever? 
>   Just moronic.


There are also some programs that outright refuse to run under a root
account.
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Back to comp.os.linux.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master jroot <jr@gnurocks.info> - 2025-08-05 18:36 +0000
  Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-08-05 21:34 +0200
    Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2025-08-06 07:37 +0200
      Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-08-06 12:18 +0200
    Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-06 13:46 +0100
      Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-08-07 22:11 +0200
        Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2025-08-07 14:57 -0700
    Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 10:45 +0000
  Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2025-08-06 07:46 +0000
    Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-06 03:58 -0400
      Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2025-08-06 23:39 +0000
    It must be a troll (was: Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master) vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-08-06 23:51 +0000
      Re: It must be a troll (was: Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master) Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2025-08-07 08:00 +0000
        Re: It must be a troll (was: Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master) Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-08-07 19:36 +0000
          Re: It must be a troll "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-07 15:54 -0400
            Re: It must be a troll Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2025-08-09 08:43 +0000
            Re: It must be a troll candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2025-08-11 19:40 +0000
              Re: It must be a troll rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-08-12 01:47 +0000
          Re: It must be a troll (was: Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master) Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 12:43 +0000
            Re: It must be a troll (was: Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master) Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> - 2025-08-09 12:59 +0000
              Re: It must be a troll (was: Re: More Horrifying Sacrilege From A GNU/Linux Master) Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2025-08-09 21:31 +0000
            Re: It must be a troll Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-09 16:20 +0100
              Re: It must be a troll "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-09 11:31 -0400
                Re: It must be a troll Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-08-09 17:19 +0100
                Re: It must be a troll "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2025-08-09 12:51 -0400
                Re: It must be a troll "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-08-09 20:01 +0200

csiph-web