all 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 5 days ago

Compatibility?

Have you missed the last 20+ mentor-less "lost boy" years of coders blindly rediscovering all the mistakes we learned from already and dealing with them with a limited toolbox? Backward compatibility is so "lol boomer" to these post-learning efforts and super-boring.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 5 days ago

    Same with the recent transition to uutils, which aren't completely compatible but they are new so that's apparently fine (if people on the fediverse to be believed).

  • source
  • 3 comments in c/librebyte@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 1 point 4 days ago (1 child)

    I'm getting 403'd, so I can't read it, but sudo-rs is not compatible with the original sudo by design because they are intentionally omitting insecure options. The original creature of sudo supports the Rust rewrite.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    The article argues it has also made a more insecure design choice then it comes to patterns/wildcards in sudoers-files

    The Rust sudo has apparently opted to keep the single most dangerous wildcard while disallowing all of the wildcards that allow one to be narrow and specific about what you're allowing, and it buries this at the end of a section that devotes a bunch of words to describing functionality it doesn't have and doesn't support, with absolutely nothing else in that section to say this (either up front or in the descriptions of how all the wildcards would work if sudo-rs supported them, which it doesn't).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 days ago

    On personal devices I prefer run0, but idk if it can handle complex configurations yet

  • source