(Calm down. It was a joke. We actually do know there's no felt, and we clean all the grime off the rollers, and we do it every couple of years. So all you germophobic neat freaks can just chill.)
> I personally don't have much gripe against sudo
The gripe probably isn't with sudo as such so much as the way it's configured on Ubuntu by default.
In particular, on Debian you use the root password to do admin functions with sudo; whereas, on Ubuntu you use your *own* password to gain root privs. I suspect this is what the other poster is complaining about.
Which way is better depends on the circumstances. For the systems I administer, as it happens, the Debian way is significantly preferable; but I can easily imagine multi-admin scenarios where the Ubuntu setup would result in better overall security and accountability. What's really needed, IMO, is some good documentation on how to decide which configuration is right for any given system (and how to make the change if necessary).
Realistically, anyone with physical access can easily get the passwords anyway, by using a hosts file (or equivalent) to cause them to be sent to a local http server.
So yeah, if your computer is not physically secure (and most aren't), don't store data on it that you need to keep secret.
They are relatively good but absolutely terrible. -- Alan Kay, commenting on Apollos