Who's in charge?
-
Some do. I'm sure it is possible with terminal programs. In KDE, you do get authenticator pop-ups.
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
š§ eats booger -
Edge is literally the first program I use on a fresh install.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]You can install firefox via cli like powershell.
winget install Mozilla.Firefox -
I have Windows 10 Pro. I can alter the permissions for anything. If I wanted to, I could delete System32 and fuck the whole thing up.
Pretty sure you can do that for home as well, just as long as you aren't in S mode.
Otherwise, admin console and clear the file permissions.
All that being said, for your average user, if you are trying to delete a file and windows says you don't have permission, it's probably best to leave it alone.
-
I'm pretty sure I can. It just takes a little more effort actually going into the permissions tab of the files because Windows doesn't have an equivalent to CHMOD AFAIK.
Though, I am pretty sure you can do those basic permission options without Pro or Enterprise. You just need to be on an administrator account. Other things, like messing with actual system files, requires the Group Policy Editor.
Windows has
icaclsandGet/Set-Aclfor permissions. You can also manipulate ownership, although it's quite convoluted. Just doingtakeownis the easiest.I'm conflicted on linux vs windows in this regard. I liked ACLs in Windows, but if a software/installer decided to mess it up, it was messed up good, and required lots of manual intervention.
-
POOF
Wish 1: Delete your self (the genie deletes your sense of self)
Would the genie get stuck in an endless loop, trying to find the owner of the three wishes for wish 2?
-
Until you realize you just screwed up whatever services you may be running that require specific permissions on specific files. Certificates specifically come to mind for my environment.
Then don't mess with things you don't understand? I don't see how this relates to gui vs cli.
-
No, but this time the owner knows why it doesn't work. Big difference in IT.
Is the power cable connected? No? Okay plug it in, then turn it off and back on again.
-
This post did not contain any content.
sudo chown <username> <file>chmod 700 <file>Donāt see a problem
/s -
You can install firefox via cli like powershell.
winget install Mozilla.FirefoxFirst command I run on any new Windows install
-
I prefer to run subatomic Linux
Disk block cryptographic signatures with automatic recovery?
-
But webview constantly reinstalls itself.
-
Would the genie get stuck in an endless loop, trying to find the owner of the three wishes for wish 2?
Fortunately the wisher is indistinguishable from a behavioral perspective of a P-Zombie, so they can still make wishes
-
This post did not contain any content.
idk tf chown does, use sudo instead. im not going to read
man chowneither.sudo su # do shenanigans in the cli/tui. gui is for noobs # nvim, ls, touch, stroke, tease, rm -
idk tf chown does, use sudo instead. im not going to read
man chowneither.sudo su # do shenanigans in the cli/tui. gui is for noobs # nvim, ls, touch, stroke, tease, rmSo I'm not the best at this, but this is my best guess (I have no experience in sysadmin, as I've only ever been the sole user of my PC and prefer not to network anything).
Owner #1, smackyboi, has ownership of a file called
smutgame.AppImage. This means they can choose who accesses smutgame, if it can execute, if it can be read or written by certain groups, etc.Owner #2, luvurealgood, on the system via their own account (or networked computer in the case of server storage) can't change these settings unless smackyboi says they could, because they're the owner and can add luvurealgood to the admin group for the file if they want. Smackyboi suddenly writes,
sudo chown luvurealgood smutgame.AppImage.Now luvurealgood owns that file and can make every change they want to it, including removing smackyboi from accessing it, as they're no longer the owner. They can lock down the file and forbid it from being executed, etc etc. I believe anyone who is in the admin group of that file can do anything to it as well, except change it's ownership if its already owned.
This is just from pieces of info and my tiny experience in Windows sysadmin shenanigans. Someone swoop in and correct me if I got anything wrong.
-
I don't know what's the hate with edge, it works wonderfully for an average user, it's fully configurable with add-ons and handles security policies really well
The AI integration might be a bit over the top but nothing you can't disable in your side
Really I don't see why you guys pile on so much on it
Because itās my fucking computer and I shouldnāt have to edit the registry to uninstall a program I donāt use.
After every update itās also reset to my default browser which is infuriating
-
That's a weird stance to take since the discussion was about file permissions, and there are absolutely ways around Windows protecting system files just like there are ways around Linux doing the same thing.
There are many reasons to criticize Microsoft, but making it difficult for users to fuck up system files isn't one of them. Most users are of the "it's a box filled with magic smoke" variety, and they need to be protected from themselves.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Oh we absolutely can throw shade at MS when they use the very same schemes to install "features" you cannot turn off or applications you cannot uninstall.
FUCK MS for deciding what invasive spyware-I-mean-features to turn on with no recourse for the average user.
-
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
š§ eats boogerwrote on last edited by [email protected]Thatās the result of polkit (policy kit) authentication agents. These are typically DE-specific for their GUIs.
pkexec is comparable to sudo and can be used from the terminal to get the graphical prompt for elevated commands.
-
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?
Linux apps follow simplicity principles. If you don't have permission to delete a file, why assume you may know the password of the user who has permission?
You can preface
sudoto any command to execute it with root privileges, which would be similar to running as admin in windows.Graphical apps do tend to ask for authentication if it makes sense. No userland apps should need more permissions than the current user's in order to run.
-
Microsoft's monopoly and their for-profit anti-consumer practices is what's wrong with it. Their history says they cannot be trusted. I'd ask myself why they need a browser in the first place.
Yup. As someone who lived through the internet explorer dark ages, I'm not eager for google and or Microsoft to have complete dominance
-
Glad to see another voice of sanity regarding Windows.
If you haven't learned by now, on Lemmy the only valid option for dealing with Windows configuration and basic Windows admin tasks is to yeet Windows and go to Linux.
Sometimes one wants to access a file without making changes though. Escalating privileges is the answer in this scenario and windows doesn't make that as easy,as it doesn't really want to you act as SYSTEM
