Re: parted is ALMOST suitable

From	Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.user
Subject	Re: parted is ALMOST suitable
Date	2016-11-09 18:40 +0100
Message-ID	<sBF0R-1Ui-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(5 earlier) <sBj0m-4ko-43@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBjto-4Ab-41@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBkSt-5IO-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBlvb-5XM-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBnQm-7DS-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue 08 Nov 2016 at 17:54:41 -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:

> >> > Futzing with partitions is the admin's job.
> >> Could be, but it's not (g)parted's job to enforce these kinds of rules:
> >> that's what Unix permissions (and Linux's capabilities) are for.
> >> It's OK to add a warning and prompt the user to make sure he really
> >> means to do that, but there's no point *preventing* the user from
> >> shooting his own foot with this tool if he can do it with other
> >> tools anyway.
> 
> > Users here get no opportunity to shoot themselves or anyone else in the
> > foot.  Access to raw disks is over my dead body.
> 
> So your users don't have access rights to the raw disks?
> Great! then (g)parted doesn't need to check anything since the kernel
> will do that already.
> 
> > So I do not understand your point.
> 
> The fact that it checks if the user is UID 0 is either useless (because
> the user doesn't have write access to the device anyway, as should
> usually be the case for the real physical devices connected to the
> machine) or annoying (because it doesn't give any extra security since
> the user can shoot himself in the foot with any number of other tools
> anyway).
> 
> It costs extra code with at best no benefit.

A well-made couple of points. But a user being able to shoot himself
in his own foot with other tools as a way of bolstering the argument
doesn't bear close scrutiny nowadays. Perhaps a reason for updating
the bug record to clarify what the issue is?

-- 
Brian.

Thread

parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 13:20 +0100
  Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 13:30 +0100
    Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 13:40 +0100
      Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 14:00 +0100
        Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 14:20 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:00 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 15:50 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 16:10 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 17:30 +0100
      Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 15:30 +0100
        Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-11-07 16:20 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Aldo Maggi <aldomaggi@katamail.com> - 2016-11-07 18:20 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 19:00 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-11-08 19:10 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Glenn English <ghe2001@gmail.com> - 2016-11-08 19:40 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-11-08 21:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 21:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-11-09 00:20 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 18:40 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 21:40 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 21:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 22:20 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 09:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 11:20 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 11:30 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 11:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 12:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 17:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-09 15:20 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 20:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-09 21:40 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 21:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-11-10 01:20 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-10 10:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 19:30 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 21:40 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-11-08 22:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-09 16:00 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 09:40 +0100
        Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 16:30 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-07 17:10 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 18:50 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-07 20:20 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-08 00:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 01:40 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2016-11-08 03:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-08 12:00 +0100
                Correction - Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-08 12:20 +0100
                Re: Correction - Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 20:30 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 13:50 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 20:10 +0100
  Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Frank <zuiderduin@gmx.com> - 2016-11-07 13:30 +0100
  Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-11-07 13:40 +0100
  Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 13:50 +0100
    Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 14:30 +0100
      Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:10 +0100
      Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 15:20 +0100
        Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-07 15:30 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:40 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 17:00 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-07 17:10 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-11-07 17:20 +0100
        Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:30 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-07 15:40 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 16:10 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 18:00 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-08 10:20 +0100
        Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-07 21:10 +0100
          Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 01:00 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-08 12:20 +0100
            Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-11 15:40 +0100
              Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-11 17:30 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-11 18:10 +0100
                Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-11 18:40 +0100
    Re: parted is ALMOST suitable David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-11-07 15:10 +0100
      Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:10 +0100
  Re: parted is ALMOST suitable rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-11-07 15:00 +0100

csiph-web