Reported bugs -- yes they were

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 3/10/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> This has already been discussed in the lists before. If a person has
> physical access to the system, he can always turn it off or set your
> system on fire, so merely controlling the ability to turn off or reboot
> the system doesnt provide any real security and is a hiderance to
> getting work done. This is by no means a blocker bug that needs to be
> dealt with one week before a release anyway.

I wonder.... would it be possible for a local admin to write a custom
pam stack which made the issue of a "guest" getting these "console"
permission... without getting into the whole discussion of the
underlying pointlessness of it to protect against malicious users
intent on turning off a system.

It maybe ultimately pointless, but its not worth arguing about. If
there is a way right now to rewrite pam related configurations to make
this issue go away.. i think we should just write it down in the wiki
and point anyone complaining about this to the wiki.

-jef"You can't talk sense into a local sysadmin intent on perverting
your worldview as to what correct behavior is... just appease them as
quickly as possible and move on"spaleta