SMF 2.0 Beta 2 Released to Charter Members

[Mysticalhead]

wow. definately grateful for the thorough. i use my smf all day and it's always always been dependable, even when I make a mess of it. Thanks on behalf of the boys at hxxp:mysticalhead.net [nonactive]. Looking forward to 2.0 !

Does anyone know if the new Permissions controls allow you to keep a private board, even from other Administrators?
I had to un-admin a guy so I could keep a secret stash. hard feelings. anything along these lines?

[HecKel]

If you don't trust in one admin..., why do you have him as admin?

Admins can do anything they want, this is obvious...

[Gary]

Exactly, if Administrators by definition can do anything and see everything. We dont give into the Root Admin/Admin membergroups that other softwares do because, personally, I think it's stupid.

However, if you do want to go that route, then rename Administrator to Root Admin and create a new membergroup Administrator and assign that membergroup appropriate permissions.

[青山 素子]

We dont give into the Root Admin/Admin membergroups that other softwares do because, personally, I think it's stupid.

Note that his opinion isn't the actual reason this isn't done. It should probably be "....other softwares do, and personally, I think..."

I'll try to explain a bit more on how things are set up. Basically, we have one group that bypasses all permission checks and all restrictions. This is the "Administrator" group. I believe it is built this way because it provides a safety net should permissions in general become mixed up. Even if somehow all permissions were removed, a user in the administrator group would be able to log in and fix the situation. If you have the ability to limit what an "administrator" can do, then you lose this ability. Think about the same situation, but administrators are powerless too.

This design makes the Administrator group a very powerful group, so it should be used wisely. It is general good practice to limit membership in that group to a very small number of people. For other people that you need to give power to, you can create a normal group and grant permissions for their duties.

[Xarcell]

wow. definately grateful for the thorough. i use my smf all day and it's always always been dependable, even when I make a mess of it. Thanks on behalf of the boys at Mysticalhead.net. Looking forward to 2.0 !

Does anyone know if the new Permissions controls allow you to keep a private board, even from other Administrators?
I had to un-admin a guy so I could keep a secret stash. hard feelings. anything along these lines?

In my opinion you shouldn't never make anyone an "admin". Just create another membergroup with admin-like permissions(what you need) and name it admin.

[falguni1]

wow. definately grateful for the thorough. i use my smf all day and it's always always been dependable, even when I make a mess of it. Thanks on behalf of the boys at Mysticalhead.net. Looking forward to 2.0 !

Does anyone know if the new Permissions controls allow you to keep a private board, even from other Administrators?
I had to un-admin a guy so I could keep a secret stash. hard feelings. anything along these lines?

In my opinion you shouldn't never make anyone an "admin". Just create another membergroup with admin-like permissions(what you need) and name it admin.

good idea.

[Ðyєgσv]

But Administrators are still vulnerable to other groups that can manage members, since they can change all of my information, and thus hack my forum. I don't give untrustworthy people any kind of power, but it would still be good and feel more secure by making the people in the Administrators group untouchable for people out of that group

[Gary]

People in the administrator membergroup are immune from people in other membergroups from being de-admined.

Ie. a Global Moderator with manager members permissions can not remove the administrator membergroup from an admin.

[HecKel]

But, if a GM can manage members permissions, he can set himself as an admin and then de-admin other admins...

In my opinion, this kind of questions shouldn't be asked, 'cause one admin only sets this kind of permissions to someone that they really trust, so, if you don't trust in that person, don't give him that kind of permissions, simple.

[JayBachatero]

You can't change your permissions to be higher than what you are.

[HecKel]

You can't change your permissions to be higher than what you are.

In 1.1.4 I can, I just did that to test..., but my usergroup has all the permissions checked (is a secondary group), how can I restricted that? (sorry to ask for support here)

[ByLegenS]

thanks

[Ðyєgσv]

People in the administrator membergroup are immune from people in other membergroups from being de-admined.

Ie. a Global Moderator with manager members permissions can not remove the administrator membergroup from an admin.

But as I already said, someone in another non-administrator group could easily change my password. That way they could access my account and promote themselves, or simply delete everything from my account and make a mess . . . I think people in the Administrator group should be untouchable for anyone outside that group, regardless if I let them edit members or not . . .

[Jade Elizabeth]

People in the administrator membergroup are immune from people in other membergroups from being de-admined.

Ie. a Global Moderator with manager members permissions can not remove the administrator membergroup from an admin.

But as I already said, someone in another non-administrator group could easily change my password. That way they could access my account and promote themselves, or simply delete everything from my account and make a mess . . . I think people in the Administrator group should be untouchable for anyone outside that group, regardless if I let them edit members or not . . .

I agree...
Founding admin should be UNTOUCHABLE by default from EVERYONE except the founding admin...in other words, if your user ID is 1, no one should be able to touch your account settings or details at all.

[Thantos]

People in the administrator membergroup are immune from people in other membergroups from being de-admined.

Ie. a Global Moderator with manager members permissions can not remove the administrator membergroup from an admin.

But as I already said, someone in another non-administrator group could easily change my password. That way they could access my account and promote themselves, or simply delete everything from my account and make a mess . . . I think people in the Administrator group should be untouchable for anyone outside that group, regardless if I let them edit members or not . . .

Giving permissions is a lot like giving trust.  If you can't trust the person to not abuse it then don't give them that access.

I agree...
Founding admin should be UNTOUCHABLE by default from EVERYONE except the founding admin...in other words, if your user ID is 1, no one should be able to touch your account settings or details at all.

There is nothing special about user ID 1.  Heck for the longest time we didn't even have a user with an ID of 1 here.  The user that was created and given that ID isn't even an admin here.

[Jade Elizabeth]

People in the administrator membergroup are immune from people in other membergroups from being de-admined.

Ie. a Global Moderator with manager members permissions can not remove the administrator membergroup from an admin.

But as I already said, someone in another non-administrator group could easily change my password. That way they could access my account and promote themselves, or simply delete everything from my account and make a mess . . . I think people in the Administrator group should be untouchable for anyone outside that group, regardless if I let them edit members or not . . .

Giving permissions is a lot like giving trust.  If you can't trust the person to not abuse it then don't give them that access.

I agree...
Founding admin should be UNTOUCHABLE by default from EVERYONE except the founding admin...in other words, if your user ID is 1, no one should be able to touch your account settings or details at all.

There is nothing special about user ID 1.  Heck for the longest time we didn't even have a user with an ID of 1 here.  The user that was created and given that ID isn't even an admin here.

well I just mean the user who CREATED the forum should be untouchable, or at least have to option to specify which ID is the one that cant be edited.

[Ðyєgσv]

I agree with Alundra. It's true that you should not be giving powers to people you don't trust, but we're human, and power corrupts people. What if a person I have trusted for 2 years wake up a day with a bad mood and decides to take over my forum because we have a simple fight? I know you will say "Then he wasn't trustworthy enough" and all those things, but we're talking about security here, which is supposed to be the main aim of SMF.

All I'm asking for is a better security measure, even if it's just preventive, because this could cause many many problems for a lot of people, and I want to feel secure with the software I'm using.

[Ol' Wombat]

To summarize this thread:

I find it a sensible idea to have one master-admin (not group) who holds ultimate powers - the admin group should be more limited to prevent possible evilness.

If it is possible for a GM (in 114) to elevate (set himself) into an admin then this is a serious security bug - have not tested it with beta 2 thou.

[metallica48423]

I don't feel this is the place for this discussion.

Please start up a topic in the Feature Requests

[Sverre]

People in the administrator membergroup are immune from people in other membergroups from being de-admined.

Ie. a Global Moderator with manager members permissions can not remove the administrator membergroup from an admin.

This security measure is basically useless as long as the same restrictions are not applied to the "Edit account settings (any profile)" permission as well. At the very least there should be a big red warning in the help text stating that administrator accounts can be hijacked with this permission allowed.