Computer Hope
Software => BSD, Linux, and Unix => Topic started by: Geek-9pm on April 13, 2009, 02:20:19 PM
-
Ubuntu user password. How can I reset it?
Yes, I did install Ubunru 8.1 all the way on my desktop PC.
But I forgot the password for my main account. I can get in allright, but can no do anything that requires permission. :-[
So, do I have to re install all the way?
Is there a to use the Boot CD to reset the password?
-
a) to reset an ordinary user's password
su to root and use passwd username
b) to reset the root password
I trust this this is your computer or you have the owner's permission to do this, but its common knowledge so what the heck
boot from a recovery CD, or download Knoppix and burn that to a CD and boot from it, then mount the root filesystem and edit the /etc/shadow file. Reomve the encrypted password from the root account, and then reboot.
Next time you login as root there will be no password, although you'll probably have to hit ENTER when propmted for the password.
-
So, folks, if you don't want anybody to do this on your system, disable booting from CDROM or pen drive or floppy in the BIOS, and set a (strong) BIOS password.
-
well as you can see Linux is SOOO much more secure then windows... ::)
-
well as you can see Linux is SOOO
much more secure then windows... Roll Eyes
You wee joking..Right?
Windows has the potential to become very secure, because they do not have to maintain compatibility with thousands of programs that are GPL.The windows programmers can work under one roof and keep their work private. So they should have an advantage.
But time will tell.
-
because they do not have to maintain compatibility with thousands of programs that are GPL.
But they have to make sure that popular programs, which often do the wrong thing still work in newer windows versions.
This is the reason programs become "incompatible"- They change some undocumented or broken behaviour in some obscure DLL, and then suddenly they discover that company X's popular, thousand dollar application, Y was depending on undocumented behaviour.
This is like when programs would assume that a handle was a 2-byte integer. They would litterally declare their handle variables as a short. the accepted method was to use the appropriate typedefs in windows.h- and they found out why when they tried to port their applications to windows 95.
Half the work of making a program "compatible" with a newer version of windows- in fact half of the investigation to find to cause, is done by MS, NOT the company who created to program.
So don't say that MS doesn't make any effort to keep programs compatible. Somehow I think stepping through the dissassembly for DOOM to make it run on windows 95 (this is MS, NOT ID software- ID software had the money from their sales and probably didn't give a rat's *censored*).
http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/
This is why they create APIs rather then just spell out what behaviour should occur. this way, if they want to change the behaviour, they change the API, and then all the programs that were written correctly to use the API rather then make assumptions about the location of folders and registry keys will use the new method without recompiling a DLL.
Besides- Linux doesn't maintain very good compatibility between distributions. Half the time you have to make sure your kernel is correct, your compiling with the proper version of GCC, your not using some switch that bugs out with the newest version of the C precompiler.
All the while reseting a password on this supposedly "secure" operating system consists of simply deleting a file. I can totally see why security zealots love linux so much.
-
All the while reseting a password on this supposedly
"secure" operating system consists of simply deleting a file. I can totally see why security zealots love Linux so much.
I was surprised too when I found that Ubuntu makes it so easy.
Years ago I have a dial-up ISP using Red Hat. The gave some free space to each user. I could log in with a terminal to upload stuff to my page. I was surprised by how I could move up the dir tree and see the names of other users. I could not get into their folders, but just the idea that I could go up one level and see them! Hard to believe! Just knowing the user names on a server is a security issue.
Hey, now with that insight, :P
can I get a job with your company as a security expert!
-
Come on guys.
With all of the:
""Help!!!!! I forgot my password
Help!!!! my idiot brother changed the password
Help!!!! my 2 year old son changed my password
Help!!!! my crazy ex hacked my system and changed my password
Help!!!! I have been out of the country for 6 months and forgot my password
Help!!!! my companies ex-IT person changed all the passwords before quitting the company
Help!!!! my neighbors, girl friend's, cousin's, brother's, father's, sister's goldfish changed my password""
type post we see and tell the posters we can't help them we are going to just leave this one as is?
-
Come on guys.
With all of the:
""Help!!!!! I forgot my password
Help!!!! my idiot brother changed the password
Help!!!! my 2 year old son changed my password
Help!!!! my crazy ex hacked my system and changed my password
Help!!!! I have been out of the country for 6 months and forgot my password
Help!!!! my companies ex-IT person changed all the passwords before quitting the company
Help!!!! my neighbors, girl friend's, cousin's, brother's, father's, sister's goldfish changed my password""
type post we see and tell the posters we can't help them we are going to just leave this one as is?
Well exactly.
-
I was surprised by how I could move up the dir tree and see the names of other users. I could not get into their folders, but just the idea that I could go up one level and see them! Hard to believe! Just knowing the user names on a server is a security issue.
This can easily be fixed chmod go-r /users
The point is that Unix systems are more secure when connected to the internet, and as no-one wants to spend $2 million on a server only to find that they have to scrap it because someone accidentally mis-spelt to login shell for root, so they have been designed with the concept that if you physically break in to the server room at the company's HQ then you can reset the root password.
Unfortunately, for a small linux system at home, you don't have a security guard patrolling your lounge to check your younger brother isn't hacking, but at least if you change the locks on the front door your ex shouldn't be able to hack it as easy as they would a Windows system on the internet.
-
Good point, banjo67xxx. There is a supposition built into the Linux ethos (isn't there?) often misplaced I guess, that Linux system administrators (that's you, if you run a Linux box) know what they are doing, know how to find out the things that they don't know yet, and know what they need to do to maximize security. Encrypt their data, prevent booting from CD, access control for the server room, whatever. On the other hand, you cannot make that assumption at all about Windows users.
-
If set up properly, LINUX is far superior to windows for security.
Go to
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/22/security_report_windows_vs_linux/
to get an independent assessment.
-
ahh, of course- in person it really doesn't matter how secure it is.
it's the internet facing vulnerabilities.
Anyone recall that red-hat had a backdoor accidentally left in? I think it was "pinata" and I forget the password. They have of course fixed this, I think it was in one distro for a very short time.
regardless, if I was going to create a server, I would definitely go with some form of Linux, if only because I don't want to have to pay for a server version of windows, or fiddle about with IIS or something. Also because I haven't done anything really with Linux.