I will use it. I don’t care what others think. People can use su, sudo, doas, run0 by their choice, and I don’t see why we need a common opinion about it.
This. One thing Linux is about is personal freedom.
A lot of people are afraid of systemd expanding because systemd handles a lot of stuff, so distros are likely to support it rather than the mishmash of tools they personally prefer. It all started with the System-V/Upstart replacement and now very few distros have the patience to customise and roll out the 90s style service management anymore. Their preferences used to align with the mainstream, but no longer do these days, and that causes friction.
This process pushes people who prefer old tools to fringe distros, and newer software is less likely to work on their setups. They’re still free to use whatever system they like, of course, but the burden for developing and maintaining daemon management scripts is now on their fringe distro or themselves if their distro doesn’t have anything yet. I’d find that pretty annoying too, especially with how convoluted many older system management scripts are and how many moving parts are typically involved. Plus, some stuff like socket activation can’t even be done with some of the older init systems so people have to find alternatives.
I doubt anyone reeling against run0 was ever going to consider it anyway.
If you make users sign in too much, they will just make their passwords short and easy to remember, even 24hrs is too much and people bitch about it all the time, especially since we have password managers enforced, meaning every time they need to Auth they need to Auth into their system, Auth into their password manager, copy the password, auth into their phone, look at the 2FA code and type that in.
Doing this every day just to open email is understandably fucking enraging even to me as a security “”“engineer”“”/analyst/${bullshitblueteamemailreaderjob}
Press it harder and they will use simple passwords that will inevitably be passed through to something external (e.g. cockpit which even I can bruteforce) or reused somewhere at some point, and then someone just has to get lucky once and run whatever
run0 sudo su <reverse shell bs here>to bypass all protections.or reused
somewhereeverywhereat some pointconstantlyI agree with you. If i had to add my password everytime I’d just add my personal account to sudo group.
Good security works with people, not against them.
No.
You say that, but, lennart’s Cancer is everywhere.
This just sounds like a a solution in search of a problem.
sudo has more than 220k lines of code, I can definitely see the use of a simpler alternative.
Don’t doas already fill that gap ?
run0 is just an alias for a part of systemd, so installing doas too would be useless bloat. Another thing to note is that doas is just smaller sudo, you still wouldn’t use 99 % of its features.
edit: also from my totally surface level understanding both sudo and doas “elevate your privileges” which is supposedly unnecessary attack surface. run0 does it in a better way which I do not understand.
also from my totally surface level understanding both sudo and doas “elevate your privileges” which is supposedly unnecessary attack surface. run0 does it in a better way which I do not understand.
sudoanddoasare setuid binaries, a special privileged bit to tell the kernel that this binary is not run as the user starting it, but as the owner. A lot of care has to be incorporated into these to make sure you don’t escalate your privileges as the default interface is very limited, being a single bit.Another issue with this approach is that since you’re running this from your shell, the process will by default inherit all environment variables, which can be convenient, but also annoying (since a privileged process might write into your $HOME) or upright dangerous.
run0doesn’t use that mechanism.systemdis, being a service manager at its core, something launching binaries in specialized environments, e.g. it will start an nginx process under the nginx user with a private tmp, protecting the system from writes by that service, maybe restrict it to a given address family etc. So the infrastructure to launch processes – even for users viasystemd-run– is already there.run0just goes one step further and implements an interface to request to start elevated (or rather with permissions different from their own) processes from a user’s shell.Classic solutions do it like this:
- user starts binary with setuid (let’s say
sudo) that runs with root (because that’s the owner of the binary) privileges in their shell. Since this is a child process of their shell, it inherits all environment variables by default. sudochecks/etc/sudoersif that user is authorized to perform the requested action and either denies the request, performs it or asks for authentication.- a new process is spawned from it, again inheriting the environment variables that were not cleaned, as you can’t get rid of variables by forking (this is often an issue if you have services that have their secrets configured via environment variables)
With
run0:- user starts
run0binary as a user process. This process inherits the environment variables. run0forwards the user’s request via interface to the running systemd process (pid 1 I guess). That process however does not inherit any variables by default, since it was started outside the user’s shell.- systemd checks if the user who started the
run0binary is allowed to perform the requested operation and again, either denies the request, performs it or asks for authentication. - a new process is spawned from it, but it will only receive the environment variables that were explicitly requested as there’s no inheritance.
At least that’s my understanding, I haven’t looked too much into it or used it yet.
- user starts binary with setuid (let’s say
Not if no one uses it.
No one will use this either
The original problem was to automagically prompt the user for password, if he tried to run some systemd executable without the wheel privileges. At some point they decided to reuse the code for [a command that allows you to run stuff as root] replacement because sudo is too bloated and vulnerable.
I might try run0 for fun, but I don’t think it’ll replace sudo any time soon.
The biggest issue I see is run0 purposely not copying any environment variables except forTERM.
You’d have to specify which editor to use, the current directory, stuff likePATHandHOMEevery time you run a command.deleted by creator
You can’t really install packages or modify configs on the host without root. Containers can only do some parts.
sudohad several severe security bugs caused by copying env variables so I’m not surprised run0 isn’t doing much of that. I’ve had to help a whole bunch of people fix the permissions/ownership on their Jo. E directory after runningsudoso I can even see the point of jot copying $HOME by default.I don’t think it’ll replace sudo necessarily, or doas would’ve done that already. It’s still useful as a shorthand for systemd-run and in some locked down system configurations I can see it being useful (i.e. when minimising the amount of SUID binaries). Maybe some elaborate enterprise setups will switch to it for security reasons, especially if they’re already leveraging PolKit heavily.
I’m not a fan of the idea at all, but come on, it can’t really be that bad. There’s got to be somewhere you can tell it what environment variables to use. Probably something like
run0 systemd-edit /usr/system/systemd/systemrun/run0-environment --system-default=systemit can’t really be that bad.
LoL; you say that… But
Alias it to pull those in automatically?
Maybe, but now I still need to remember the alias or distribute it to any machine I’m working on.
Not that difficult if you have everything managed with Ansible or similar anyways, but lots of people likely don’t have that setup.
Su - then
Systemd, not linux
systemd/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, systemd plus Linux
Meaning, run0 is overengineered too?
imo it’s kinda like bash’s bloatness. Sure, I’d use a less bloated shell but I need bash as a bash interpreter regardless, so using a smaller shell would actually be more bloat. In a similar way you already have systemd, so you don’t really gain any more bloat by having this alias for systemd-run or how it’s called.
As it is running sudo with a long process is annoying missing and having to reenter my password or missing and the process timing out if I go afk to wait, I can’t imagine having to type my password every few moments when I run an upgrade. Surely this is not the pitch. This is already looking dead in the water if so, and god help me if I have to remember to type run0.
No no no
It’ll be systemctl --user enable --now systemd-run0dI’m dead
Prompting for every single command seems like it’d suck
Also, you can configure sudo to prompt every time if you really want.
I was on a system that was configured that way for “security”, so I would just ‘sudo bash’ which is obviously much safer /s.
My system is configured that way (by me) and I regularly use sudo -s.
I just want to see if there’s a root shell and not rely on some hidden timeout 🙄
Yeah I mean at that point it’s redundant because you might as well type su -c “some command here”. On the other hand having such alias does no harm if you’re already using systemd.
Sometimes I really hate the utility names people come up with.
I would love to see chatgpt rename all the core utils in a way that summarizes their function.
The name does do what it says & in just 4 char
At the moment, fish doesn’t know what to do with run0. When that changes, I’ll start using it :)
Is it going to eventually add kernel functionality and become GNU/run0 like systemd? If not i’ll keep using sudo on Ubuntu and doas everywhere else.
I don’t know, we’ll just have to see. But personally, I am not a fan of tying so many functionalities to systemd.
I’ll stick with doas
Speaking of doas, is there any advantage of using it when… sudo is still available to be used? I agree that most of the stuff we require to use doesn’t need all the options sudo as, but if it is for the sake of security, maintenance, and stability… is there any reason to use doas ON TOP of the already setup sudo or su? In the past, I even tried to just apply a simple alias to replace sudo with doas, but numerous scripts and programs when trying to request explicit super-user permissions, just didn’t know what to do with doas as expected, so this ain’t it.
I agree that most of the stuff we require to use doesn’t need all the options sudo as
Main reason of using doas
but numerous scripts and programs when trying to request explicit super-user permissions, just didn’t know what to do with doas as expected
I’ve only found one software like that and it’s tipi, and it’s kinda dumb for a software to require such a easily replacable software. Also how openbsd users are supposed to do ? Having both doas and sudo on their machine which is unnecessary bloat ?
Sure do confirm that hard-coded sudo requirements are kinda dumb. But this proove systemd point. BSD mainly use doas. Linux mainly use sudo. Why not have an universal method for true cross-platform compatibility ? (Yes, I know plenty prefer or explicitly are against the usage of systemd suite of software, was pointing out systemd main reason of planning to propose an another standard, regardless if it will be popular or not)
Speaking of doas, is there any advantage of using it when… sudo is still available to be used?
I like that its configuration file is very very simple.
When was the last time you had to edit sudo configuration file ? Same goes for doas. It’s has nothing going for, for the majority of desktop Linux users (from what I got as an answer)
A month ago or so to be able to use zramen without root password.
doass
No, it’ll just be yet another pile of bloat that’ll separate IBM distros and their followers (rhel, fedora, centos, debian, arch) from the rest (alpine, void, gentoo, devuan, *BSD).
Wait Arch and Debian are owned by IBM? It sounds like one insane piece of conspiracy tbh.
Nah, I’m just referring to IBM’s acquisition of redhat. I’ve been referring to redhat as IBM in kind.
And neither Arch, nor Ubuntu, nor Debian, nor OpenSUSE, nor any other distro using systemd belongs to IBM.
systemd has nothing to do with any corporation doing bad stuff to “our Linux”.
It is just newer software, doing more things more easily.
Sure, the centralization is pretty damn bad. But for example replacing sudo is needed.
But for example replacing sudo is needed.
There’s plenty of 100-loc tools for that already. And doas, who has most of sudo’s server-features, is not much bigger.
And they all work even without systemd or services.
But for example replacing sudo is needed.
Seriously asking: what’s wrong with Sudo? And aren’t there already loads of alternatives?
I suppose doas is a pretty great alternative.
Smaller code is often good, but not always.
systemd nightmare needs to end. Too many broken garbage from malicious actors within the opensource community.
Just as an experiment, get every distro to have at least 2 or 3 SysVInit / runit / rc.init alternatives, and you will see a MASS Migration back to SysVInit. Bash/shell script init functions were really dead simple and almost unbreakable/hackerproof.
Systemd really needs to be thrown in the garbage dumps of history so we can finally have a UNIX-like boot back.
As someone who writes bash scripts, fuck no, this is a terrible language and it shouldn’t be used for anything more complex than sticking two programs together.
Also, parallelism goes right out of the window.
Maybe you’d convince me with a real programming language.
That just made me imagine a Rust rewrite of systemd
Any time I see a grognard seriously suggest going back to bash for anything exceeding 10 lines of code it makes me very happy none of them are in control.
If systemd is as bad as you claim why did nearly every distro switch to it?
Corpo sabotage of opensource. So many community projects are under the thumb of corpo insiders. It was a “cash-grab” a way to shoehorn and takeover an essential but mostly unchanged and stable Init system. And they shimmed that into everything they could ram it into with no options or alternatives.
And neither Arch, nor Ubuntu, nor Debian, nor OpenSUSE, nor any other distro using systemd belongs to IBM.
Where did I say they belong to IBM?
Sure, the centralization is pretty damn bad. But for example replacing sudo is needed.
We already have doas, which is such a simple codebase I’d have a hard time imagining it contains a bug that leads to setuid being a problem. run0’s codebase size on the other hand…
Eeeh, if anything, systemd is Microsoft’s contribution.
/s sort of
Btw can RH as the biggest contributor to systemd make it paid like it did with RHEL? Then it’s going to be the death of the free and independent Linux desktop for quite a while.
Don’t spread lies, misinformation and/or FUD.
Btw can RH as the biggest contributor to systemd make it paid like it did with RHEL?
It’s not. They’ve only made it harder for other parties to freely benefit from RHEL’s hard work at the expense of RHEL.
Don’t spread lies, misinformation and/or FUD.
Uhm what? I asked a question bruh.
They’ve only made it harder for other parties to freely benefit from RHEL’s hard work
True but they still can find something to hurt everyone. Not like I think it will happen but it is a problem with centralization and a company being behind a big and important product.
Uhm what? I asked a question bruh.
The bold parts include a false claim; i.e. Red Hat made RHEL paid.. So it’s perfectly possible to include a lie, piece of misinformation and/or straight up FUD within a question.
True but they still can find something to hurt everyone. Not like I think it will happen but it is a problem with centralization and a company being behind a big and important product.
I agree with you that Red Hat is indeed way too powerful in this realm. Hence, there will inevitably always be the fear that they might (somehow) misuse their power. So far, they’ve been mostly benevolent and I hope it will stay that way. There’s no fault at being cautious, but this should never lead us towards toxic behavior.
EDIT: Why the downvotes?
RedHat is not restricting access to any upstream project. They package things in extremely stable form, which means they need to manage like all the software themselves and do tons of backports, as normally software just releases new versions.
They restrict access to these packages.
So yes, their 5 years old systemd with backported security fixes may be restricted. But not the normal systemd you can install anywhere.
If IBM makes redhat do something that greedy and stupid (it’d be more likely to happen with a distribution like fedora or centos than userland components), we have plenty of existing infrastructure to fall back on.
(it’d be more likely to happen with a distribution like fedora or centos than userland components
I mean, if they make an actual workstation distro and kill systemd’s real FOSS nature, everyone else will have to spend some time rebuilding their distros with other init systems. That’ll be quite a sabotage.
You are not wrong. IBM management paralleled in the same cash-grab and exit C-suite functions that has consumed Redhat. That is why the merger happened.
Soon, Purple Hat should be charging for systemd and hopefully other corpos and organizations will move back to sanity.
Soon, Purple Hat should be charging for systemd and hopefully other corpos and organizations will move back to sanity.
Unless otherwise noted, the systemd project sources are licensed under the terms and conditions of LGPL-2.1-or-later (GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later).
New sources that cannot be distributed under LGPL-2.1-or-later will no longer be accepted for inclusion in the systemd project to maintain license uniformity.
I can understand critism of systemd for its tools only working with itself and not with any other Unix tools. But it’s absolutely a conspiracy theory to think they’d want to charge for systemd. Though I do agree that if someone was charging for systemd (which they can’t because its open source), open source alternatives would pop up.
How is RH related to Arch lol? By having GNU core utils?
Arch ships redhat userland (systemd) and doesn’t support alternative userlands; you have to go to artix for that.
For clarity,
because the obnoxious ones out there didn’t get it,this refers to how Arch, Debian, Fedora and most other distros just default to systemd and hence can (and probably will) make use ofrun0. While, on the other hand, distros like Alpine, Artix, Devuan, Void and others (including *BSD-systems) will not. For distros with no defaults (e.g. Gentoo), the user gets to decide.
