On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Adam Williamson
On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 15:09 -0500, Adam Jackson wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 11:53 -0800, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > I don't understand. If a user who has the right to act as root asks
> > to authorize a program to run as root on their behalf, we should grant
> > that request. And, once we grant it, we shouldn't be
> > passive-aggressive and say "sure you can run it, but no graphics for
> > you!".
> The point is, if things in Fedora require "run this bit of GUI as root"
> in order to function, we've done a poor job. That people have bad
> habits already is not sufficient justification to encourage them to
> have more.
> To the bug in question: probably we should make it so 'sudo gedit' does
> work, but I'd still strongly discourage anyone from actually doing so.
ISTR seeing some work lately in gvfs or gio or something which would
allow GNOME-y things to acquire necessary perms for changes to files
via PolicyKit when necessary.
I've always thought this would be an entirely reasonable feature.
There's no inherent security advantage in making people run a console
editor as root instead of using their preferred graphical editor, if
the graphical editor can use an appropriately restricted permission
granting mechanism to do the job. I've certainly had times where I'd
quite have liked to edit a system file with gedit rather than nano or
If something like Capsicum ever lands, this becomes straightforward.