While this looks more secure than the original, I don't think modern operating systems should be investing resources into making privilege escalation easier for users to do. Considering UAC already exists it's not like the additon of sudo is much worse to include so overall it may be better, but I feel investing resources to get rid of the need of users needing to elevate things would be time better spent.
Sudo for Windows
61–70 of 439 posts
Re: Sudo for Windows
#62Yep, it's really happening. Sudo is coming to Windows. It's obviously not just a fork of the linux sudo - there's enough that's different about the permissions structure between OS's that just a straight port wouldn't make sense. But the dream of being able to run commands as admin, in the same terminal window - that's the experience we're finally bringing to users. I've been working on this for the last few months n…
Does the UAC prompt always say "Verified publisher: Microsoft"? Even without controlling stdin, malware at medium integrity could prompt to run a malicious command, and users will only see Microsoft's good name in the popup. Does this elevate within your own account token (i.e. will not work for non-Administrator users), or does it actually switch user (e.g. to LOCAL SYSTEM)?
Putting Microsoft in the UAC prompt is indeed weird. It should be the info of the target binary. This feature sounds a bit rushed, and it's early preview, maybe they fix it by the final release.
Re: Sudo for Windows
#63What's the difference from opening a Terminal (Admin) window? Just that you can run a single command as admin? I must be missing something here
It's faster and it keeps your current directory, opening a new Terminal starts in the default directory.
It's a convenience thing.
Re: Sudo for Windows
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ..there's enough that's different about the permissions structure between OS's that just a straight port wouldn't make sense. Does this mean that the feature set of sudo for Windows can't be similar to the feature set found on sudo for *nix e.g. for BSD, MacOS, Linux..?
Does sudo supports ACLs (which are the basis of Windows security model)?
[deleted]
Re: Sudo for Windows
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ..there's enough that's different about the permissions structure between OS's that just a straight port wouldn't make sense. Does this mean that the feature set of sudo for Windows can't be similar to the feature set found on sudo for *nix e.g. for BSD, MacOS, Linux..?
Does sudo supports ACLs (which are the basis of Windows security model)?
Sorry, I don't know.
Re: Sudo for Windows
#66This adds a factor of enshittification for NT, NT doesn't need 88 line PowerShell scripts, this "sudo for Windows" thing makes Windows seem like a teenager's high school project. Windows NT already has runas, let NT be NT and let POSIX have sudo/doas. Previously Microsoft hired the best of the best operating systems engineers in the USA who were from Digital and they proved to be people capable of making an operating…
Thanks? But sudo * isn't a 88 line PowerShell script, it's a 1800 LOC Rust binary * isn't a NT kernel feature, it's a usermode executable * was made by (in my opinion) a perfectly decent engineer. That may be thinking too highly of myself though.
I see you are one of the heads of sudo for Windows, now based on your comment I see sudo for Windows with non-so unhopeful eyes. The comment about 88 lines PS code is about sudo.ps1 on the repo, thanks for clarifying. I'd like if more consideration is taken over sudo for Windows, as the MSDN docs relate: sudo at the moment has a clear distinction with runas and you must be the one who chooses what's best, I can infere the intention is not replacing runas, but then there's two ways to the same goal and each one with its differences. It's a similar situation than it was with WMIC and WMI for PS, being this case as a longer-standing approach, WMIC is deprecated but you can still use it if you want, however WMI for PS has the same functionality as WMIC and still offering benefits over WMIC, ultimately WMIC will be removed from future Windows releases. I'd be less confusing if this route is planned for runas and sudo
Re: Sudo for Windows
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does the UAC prompt always say "Verified publisher: Microsoft"? Even without controlling stdin, malware at medium integrity could prompt to run a malicious command, and users will only see Microsoft's good name in the popup. Does this elevate within your own account token (i.e. will not work for non-Administrator users), or does it actually switch user (e.g. to LOCAL SYSTEM)?
Putting Microsoft in the UAC prompt is indeed weird. It should be the info of the target binary. This feature sounds a bit rushed, and it's early preview, maybe they fix it by the final release.
Yea, that's a limitation of UAC at this point, and probably not one we can avoid. The "Show details" dropdown on the dialog does however show the commandline you requested, so at least that's one way of making sure it's the thing you ran
Re: Sudo for Windows
#68This adds a factor of enshittification for NT, NT doesn't need 88 line PowerShell scripts, this "sudo for Windows" thing makes Windows seem like a teenager's high school project. Windows NT already has runas, let NT be NT and let POSIX have sudo/doas. Previously Microsoft hired the best of the best operating systems engineers in the USA who were from Digital and they proved to be people capable of making an operating…
They decided kernel-mode graphics isn't a terrible idea, though.
Re: Sudo for Windows
#69If it's just an alias for "runas" that presents a UAC prompt window I will be disappointed.
Initially I thought ur concern is crazy as hell, because who would implement it in such a painful way?
But then I read
>When elevating a process from the command-line with sudo, a UAC dialog will appear asking the user to confirm the elevation:
LOL
But it seems like there are other ways to use it without this dialog
>In this configuration, sudo.exe will launch a new elevated console window and run the command in that window. The new window will be launched with the same working directory as the current window. The new window will also be launched with the same environment variables as the current window. This configuration has a similar flow to the runas command.
Re: Sudo for Windows
#70We already have runas for years now. This looks like one of those KPI fulfilling projects.
> This looks like one of those KPI fulfilling projects It actually wasn't. This has been one of the top community requests for the Windows Command Line for years. Literally, for like, the entire 8 years I've been here, we've been talking about if there was a way to do Sudo for Windows. This was done because it makes developers happy, plain and simple. If that's a KPI, then that's the one we're optimizing for.
Surely by people trying to do UNIX on Windows.