Linux account permissions question vs. Windows.

[Guest HolyForce]

New to Linux, but I'm curious what it may offer in areas where I feel Windows uber sucks. I know more than one of you will agree Windows is garbage in more than one area, but I have a singular question for now:

 

In Windows, there is effectively ultimately two levels of permissions: user vs. admin. When you run most any installer, it requires admin so it can edit registry keys, file locations, etc. required to install the program. But in reality, it could do anything. All WinAPI calls are available to admin, it could even setup a service as LOCAL SYSTEM to get even higher privileges and ultimately very easily execute anything it wanted in Kernel Mode.

 

So what was the safe looking installer for a cool text editor, which required admin to install, ultimately rootkit'd your system, sent off encryption keys, logged your keyboard for awhile and did other malicious stuff.

 

I don't see a middle-ground in Windows unless I'm missing it. Is there something in Linux? I feel there should be an installer permission level that can write (in Windows speak) to some registry keys, file locations, etc. but not be able to make critical API calls that shouldn't be required.

 

I hope my question makes sense. I'm just annoyed that anything I want to obtain as a home/consumer is just always going to be trusted code and I have to give full control in all regards of my system over to any installer.

 

Continue reading...