Re: multiple root accounts

[Mike McCarty <mike mccarty sbcglobal net>]

Craig White wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 19:23 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 12:23 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2006-03-06 at 19:00 +0000, azeem ahmad wrote:
> > >
> > > > hi list
> > > > i want more than 1 root accounts in FC4, for example
> > > > user: root
> > > > user: must
> > > > user:azeem
> > > > all the 3 accounts should have the same root previligies to do anything on 
> > > > the system
> > > > how it could be done
> > >
> > > ----
> > > everyone else has suggested that you change the uid # in /etc/passwd to
> > > 0 which may very well do what you want but there is another mechanism in
> > > place...sudo which might be more in line with security...
> > >
> > > an entry in /etc/sudoers like...
> > >
> > > craig   ALL=(ALL) ALL
> > >
> > > would do something similar but you would have to supply root password to
> > > have root privileges.
> >
> > Not quite.  With sudo you need the USERS password, not the root
> > password.
> >
> >
> >
> > > if you did something like this...
> > >
> > > Cmnd_Alias IPOD=/sbin/modprobe -r sbp2
> > > Cmnd_Alias EJECT=/usr/bin/eject /dev/sda2,/usr/bin/eject /dev/sdb2
> > >
> > > craig   ALL= NOPASSWD : IPOD, EJECT
> > >
> > > then user 'craig' could do those specific commands without a password.
> > > Suit yourself, it's your system but I would ***heavily*** recommend
> > > against a real 'user' having a uid of "0"
>
> ----
> Jeff - you have an annoying habit of piping in to a message that is a
> day old, the thread has moved on and in this case, my error was already
> pointed out AND acknowledged so it becomes something akin to piling on.
> To summarize, your post was entirely without value unless it's value was
> to annoy me.
>
> Craig

Well, then, I guess it's *not* valuless!

:-)

Only kidding!

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!