[PLUG] Such a thing as a "single user" Linux?

[Rich Shepard]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014, Richard Owlett wrote:

> <chuckle> You are closer than you thought. Think a commuter
> vehicle for a roving inspector on who is on call 24/7. The *nix
> world issues the tractor portion of a tractor trailer.

   Yet the roads are wide and the tractor is easy to drive where it needs to
go. Enough ...

> I take your usage pattern to an extreme. I am not only the sole user of my
> laptops, I am the only person to have physical access. Also, initially due
> to historical accident, only *one* machine *CAN* connect to the internet.
> The others are used solely as "computing devices" [for want of a better
> word].

   Hmm-m-m-m. I'm the only one with keyboard access to my systems, too. But,
others can access the 'Net because they're networked to the router and ADSL
modem (in my case). In the mid-1990s they were still networked but accessed
the 'Net through a dial-up modem.

> This changes the whole concept of who is responsible for system integrity
> [some might use term "security" but that doesn't quite have right flavor].
> That does strange things to users, groups, permissions etc. The Linux
> Standard Way just "gets in the way" and may have holes in it.

   I don't follow you here. If you run a linux distribution as a single user
the distribution maintainers put out security update patches as necessary.
Installing them keeps you up to date. Where do you see system integrity
holes in your setup? And, why not replace your sneaker net with Ethernet, or
wireless?

   Perhaps because we don't have a clear understanding of your problem we
cannot offer a solution. I've not read anything that makes a multiuser linux
system/network unsuitable for you. Please clarify if you wish to.

Rich