• AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    Is there a technical reason that Linux apps can’t/don’t just pop up an authenticator thing asking for more privileges like Windows apps can do? Why does nano just say that the file is unwriteable instead of letting me increase the privileges?

    • Mohamed@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Some do. I’m sure it is possible with terminal programs. In KDE, you do get authenticator pop-ups.

      • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        With arch+xfce4 I mostly don’t. Except for when I do systemctl reload <service> in a cli without sudo and it pops a surprise elevation password request gui in my face. I haven’t figured out what makes it behave like that.

        I use Arch btw 👉🧐 eats booger

    • blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Iirc there are ways to format your command to get it to do this. So whatever app you’re using just chose to format its command the simpler way.

  • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    22 hours ago

    My work laptop had a pop-up from an application that basically said “we couldn’t restart last time, so you e got 15 minutes until we reboot your computer” with no way to cancel or prevent the reboot.

    Me: the fuck you are

    * proceeds to kill the service and process from admin command line*

    Get fucked fortinet, I’ll reboot when I’m gods damned ready

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    22 hours ago

    had a friend that was having problems with his PC and windows kept bitching about he didn’t have permissions. he ripped out the harddrive with it still powered on and threw it off his balcony into the lake screaming, “I fucking own you!”

    epic moment in my life to witness such an event.

    • kn33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Not necessarily. Linux can have files that are r—r—r— too

      • BlackPenguins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Then you sudo chmod. Windows I have to do weird shit with the properties context menu. And even that sometimes doesn’t work. I run commands in powershell as Administrator. Still doesn’t work.

        Fuck Windows.

  • GetOffMyLan@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you’re on windows this means you don’t own the file. Go to properties security and take ownership.

    The default windows configuration is aimed at old people who will call tech support when they fuck up their PC.

    You can take ownership of pretty much the entire filesystem.

    Windows is actually hugely customizable people just don’t.

    • applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Except when you want to customize it to stop it from updating against your will. Then fuck you, secret code to change your settings and settings that simply do nothing.

    • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Just because you have admin rights doesn’t mean the process you’ve invoked does. Unless you specifically elevate it or the process asks to elevate, it’ll run unprivileged.

  • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Think about this: let’s say you run a program. Do you want that program to be able to take over the computer and read all your files from now on and send the data to a remote third party?

    Probably not.

    Permissions were created to stop programs from doing that. By running most software without admin permissions you limit the scope of the damage the software can cause. Software you trust even less should be run with even fewer permissions than a normal user account.

    The system is imperfect though. A capability-based system is better. It allows the user to control which specific features of the operating system a running program is allowed to access. For example, a program may request access to location services in order to access your GPS coordinates. You can deny this to prevent the program from tracking you without otherwise preventing the software from running.

    • dbx12@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You forgot the fact that there might be other people using the same computer and they shouldn’t be able to access the others files.

      • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        No I didn’t. Most computers on the planet (phones, tablets, laptops) have only 1 user. The whole multi-user system isn’t obviously useful for these computers.

        Everyone knows that multiple user accounts need permissions to prevent users from accessing each other’s files. I didn’t bring it up because it was too obvious.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Ah ah ah! You didn’t say the magic word!

    sudo edit the file!

    Ah ah ah! You didn’t say the secret word right after!

  • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    This fuckin line

    Childhood me: “Whats he mean by that?”

    My parents: “[explains slavery]”

    Me: …

    Them: …

    Thanks, Disney!

    I still love the soundtrack.