linux root VS win admin
When installing a WinXP,it creates you a default user, and it is in admin group. i think everybody have winXP installed,use an administrator account.
But in Linux, everybody recommends to not to stay as root.
do not say su command,because xp also has a similar tool (switch user)
Those people are doing the wrong thing as well - even on XP you shouldn't an administrator. It's just that M$ won't realize that, and thus they put users in the admin group, once again to make the system easier to use.
Also, on Windows it doesn't matter. Your system is never secure in any case, so why go through all the trouble of not being admin when it's so easy to crack your system anyway? =)
beleive it or not this started off as ana attempt to make windows secure. The put some pathetic limits on what a guest accoutn could do, except durign testing (or mayeb after a beta release that got *****ed about) they noticed that guest users (non admin) tended to be unable to run most games and ran oteh rthings slowly for no apparent reason, somethign to do with restricting vertain files that allowed access to directX files or something. Anyway, their solution to this guest limitation, was to make all new users admin, so no-one woudl ever notice the problems.... :lol: :lol:
it is very different. In windows not everything you run, runs as you with only your permissions. Some software can do things you can't even though you ran it.
Have a look at your processes list most of the programs running in the background are system processes - even though you installed most of them.
Permissions in windows are flexible - users will often see this as a good thing. There are just a few pre-defined actions which only admins are allowed to do.
Windows permissions are more noticable in a fully networked environment when group policies can be used to enforce certain things. But even then it is a very different method of security.
Really, how does that work in Windows? I mean, in UNIX you use suid to enable certain programs to do stuff you couldn't normally do, but AFAIK Windows doesn't have a SUID equivalence, right? Does anyone actually know?
hehe i remember messing with my login at the library on a windows nt machine.. everything i tryed to click came up "this option has been restricted" or something.. all i wanted was to get a command line running. allthough all the usual stuff was int eh start menu like sys app etc you couldnt run them.. eventualy i opened ahead nero's file browser and was able to cd to windows dir and run "command" from there. the same was true for that not very good and expensiv but still popular dvd player app power dvd i think its called. from that command line i could run anything. fdisk,dxdiag,msconfig hehe.. didnt do anythign bad thoguh cus i need library acces:)
Windows NT has a sort of accounting system.
Compare the *Nix;ROOT account to the Windows; SYSTEM account.
If you want to log in as root, be my guest, but root is the most powerfull user, if you type something like rm -r -f * in the / directory, don't start whining that everything is gone, there is NO are you sure you want to do this messagebox.
That's why admin's keep root access very restricted.
I've seen a lot of Windos implementations where everyone was Administrator on every machine in the domain. :shock:
A admin's worst nightmare.
But luckaly this will not allow a total trash of the system, unless you know how to.. Which isn't hard to learn.. :twisted:
My advise: Use you own local user account and switch to root only when you need to.... Kernel or system config adjustments, as example.
One other thing.
When SU ing to root, use : su -
This also initializes the system enviroment of the user root.
Using SU only keeps the systemsettings of the current user before changing to root.