4 ms·
The fact that BeOS is single-user is news to me. I have to wonder what the security model looks like without a 'root' concept - this article's dismissal of the
by tmcw 16y ago
The fact that BeOS is single-user is news to me. I have to wonder what the security model looks like without a 'root' concept - this article's dismissal of the problem seems pretty shallow.
Obviously the "Change the World" title is just linkbait. Thanks for renaming.
- thisrod 16y agoWhat's the problem? There's one user, it's their data on the drive, and they can do what they want with it. In any case, root isn't the solution. It's a bug in Unix that Plan 9 fixed.
- pyre 16y agoNow I'm curious. How did plan9 'fix' root?
- piotrSikora 16y agoPlan 9 has no super-user. Each server is responsible for maintaining its own security, usually permitting access only from the console, which is protected by a password. For example, file servers have a unique administrative user called adm, with special privileges that apply only to commands typed at the server’s physical console. These privileges concern the day-to-day maintenance of the server, such as adding new users and configuring disks and networks. The privileges do not include the ability to modify, examine, or change the permissions of any files. If a file is read-protected by a user, only that user may grant access to others. http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/9.html http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/9.html
- tmcw 16y agoI'm no security expert, but what comes to mind is a malicious application, rather than a malicious user.
- wmf 16y agoIIRC BeOS had no security model; basically everything ran as root all the time. You might say that it had no concept of non-root. Remember that Be viewed Mac OS 8.0 and Windows 95 as their competition, not Unix.