True, a C-shell-based SUID script can be very insecure, though with a script this simple, all the user would have to do is make sure the PATH is set specifically. Or as the article states, this could also be done directly in perl, thus removing much of the insecurity overhead with Cshell scripts.
However, at least IMO, I would think that being able to set one 'program' to be SUID for a specific group of users is better than allowing one user SUDO access, as the former is more specific about what you are allowing. Say the box is a web dev box, as it appears, and you have teammember Bob on it would does script developement; Bob, while compentent, isn't fully trustworthy at least to your team, but management says he needs to be able to change web server configurations and restart the http server for him to work. Allowing Bob SUDO access to the box could be very very bad, if he truly is a problem. On the other hand, allowing Bob into the access group that can run the apache restart program via a suid bit, means that the only damage he can effectively do (besides erasing config files) is starting and stoping the web server; the rest of the box remains secure. In addition, if Bob's account was broken into by someone more malicious than Bob, and BOB had SUDO access, you could kiss your box goodbye; limiting what can be done via suid programs will prevent a total compramise of the box.
Dr. Michael K. Neylon - firstname.lastname@example.org
"You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain
"I can see my house from here!"
It's not what you know, but knowing how to find it if you don't know that's important