Skip to main content
Unix & Linux

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • great thanks - that makes sense. Whats the point in testing if its called by root then, is this just like an extra warning that the root user would need to su to another user first? Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 16:48
  • 1
    @Dori no, it's just that some applications won't let themselves be run by root because that would be a security hole. Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 16:50
  • +1 thx for the reply - it does not sound like thats really much of a solution to an identified security hole as root can switch to any other user. I guess there is the added faff maybe of working out what user would need to be switched to but I imagine that would not be too hard...? Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 16:57
  • 1
    @Dori you misunderstand, when root has switched to another user, he is no longer root but that other user so there is no security hole. The security hole is allowing the program to be run with root privileges (by root), it is not an issue unless the user running it is root. Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 17:01
  • ah I see - your saying allowing the application to run with root privileges would be dangerous as the app itself could do anything - got you :) Commented Mar 12, 2014 at 17:07