Taking Ownership?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paula
  • Start date Start date
P

Paula

There were some files that I could not open (even some on my own user name)
until I took ownership of. However, I found I had to do this on each file
every time I received a message stating I did not have permission to open
that file. Sooooooooooo I went ahead and clicked on the "C" drive and took
ownership of the entire drive and now I can open all files as far as I can
see. Is there any problem in doing that? Taking ownership of the whole C
drive I mean?
Paula
 
That sounds like the way it is designed to work. Unless, of course, its
somebody else's C: drive. :)
 
Is this the same as setting FULL CONTROL for yourself? I like Vista, but
I tend to get annoyed with some of the ''permission'' things. I am the only
one using this machine, I think I can trust me.
 
I guess you could call it that.
Although I think I spoke too soon.
I can't even get to my own cookies and I'm not even on a diet! lol
This permissions stuff is a little much IMHO.
Paula
 
I agree - I want complete control of this machine - I hate "arguing" with a
machine - I really do - how much trouble can happen by turning UAC off?
 
that is the price for security.

Linux has always used this "permission stuff" and that's why it is secure,
and Macs nowadays are also using this background. Windows has too long not
made use of this - it is a must to be secure.
 
Of course you can turn off UAC ( start-> run > msconfig > tools > "disable
uac" > Launch ) but you should not do so.
WITHOUT UAC you put the machine to the same security risks as Windows XPSP2
WITHOUT UAC InternetExplorer runs in UNPROTECTED Mode, can be manipulated
via Trojans,etc-

And you still have not access to all files and folders. The real
Administrator Account ( root account ) is hidden from you.
Even if your account type tells you that you are the Admin - you are not.

Administrator is only accesible via Safeboot or a registryhack, that I am
not aware of.

I really do not suggest you turning vistas "annoying" features off ! you
will get used to it.

See : in Linux you will be prompted ALWAYS for the Admin-Password if you are
going to do some system-settings or install software. And that means typing
name and password in, sometimes also verifying passwords. ALWAYS.

The Thing how it is handled in Vista via UAC and the fading screen is really
good and very simple and not half-way so disturbing as in a Linux System.
Believe Me. I use that also a lot.

SBJ
 
LOL Yeah. I'm about there too!
I never had any security problems in XP anyway.
I keep all security measures up to date on XP.
I'm going to give it a while longer to figure all out of course, since this
is a beta but they sure could have made the permissions a little more user
friendly!
Paula
 
Thanks for the reply - I know security is important - I have had WinXPSP2
since it came out - NEVER had a problem.
I guess we all have our preferences.
 
Paula,
You keep an eye on my machine - I'll keep an eye on yours. :o)
(I need a partner to beat up the guy who decided we cannot turn off the
"logon" sound - interested?)
 
OK let's say I will leave UAC on for now to be safe. I don't have a problem
clicking a few extra times to let Vista know it's really me trying to access
a folder. But I have not been able to grant permission to myself to access
some needed folders such as for instance my "Sent To" and my "Cookies"
folder deny me access. I have followed the steps in HELP to gain ownership
but still no go! I don't know how this is done in Linux or on a Mac but in
RC1 Vista it's not user friendly at all!
Paula
 
Be sure there will be solutions..

Some people only install new versions to find all those tweaks one can do.

And we will see in shops a lot of "tweakVista" "VistaAntiSpy" "StyleupVista"
"VistaThemesPro" "VistaOptimizer" "Secrets in Vista uncovered" "Aero on old
graphic card howto" and so on...

just a matter of time ;)

SBJ
 
Sascha said:
Of course you can turn off UAC ( start-> run > msconfig > tools >
"disable uac" > Launch ) but you should not do so.
WITHOUT UAC you put the machine to the same security risks as Windows XPSP2
WITHOUT UAC InternetExplorer runs in UNPROTECTED Mode, can be
manipulated via Trojans,etc-

And you still have not access to all files and folders. The real
Administrator Account ( root account ) is hidden from you.
Even if your account type tells you that you are the Admin - you are not.

Administrator is only accesible via Safeboot or a registryhack, that I
am not aware of.
Click to expand...

This is not true reference accessing the administrator account. Right
click My Computer | Manage | Users and Groups | Administrator -
Properties | Enable Administrator account.

Make sure you assign a password to it. It will now show up on the
Welcome Screen at login.

<snip>
 
Do you know the almighty TotalCommander, formerly known as WindowsCommander
? it is a clone of the NortonCmdr from the good old days, but has far more
to offer.

Shareware with a nagscreen, but you don't need to pay for, it works ( for
vista download the LATEST version 6.xxx ) : www.ghisler.com

Ok, install this beauty in 10 seconds ;-)
In the Menu of it go to Configuration > Display > set "show hidden and
system files" to "on"

thats all for the first run > close it and rerun totalcommander with right
click "run as Administrator" - lets browse through your files,
doubleclicking opens a folder - doubleclicking the first level [...] brings
you a level above in the tree dir.

Try if you can now access what you are looking for. Vistas Explorer seems to
block everything "security-related"..

Therefore I use totalcmdr as this works for me.
 
what you will notice when you browse your files with totalcommander is the
following:

Some folders in Vista are no folders, but only symbolic links that point to
elsewhere.
I just saw, by trying what you want to ( open "cookies" ) - that cookies is
not there. It is just a link that has no function, so to say you will see a
folder named "cookies" but it is only a dead file without content. Do not
ask me where Vista is storing the cookie sin reality, I don't know it.

That is very often seen in Windows Vista- these symlinks to other places or
to nowhere.
I think this has to do with backward-compatibility, if a program looks for
such folders, just to fool the program, but internally points to the new
Vista-folders.

We need a MS-Developer from the Vista-Build-Team to explain this.

SBJ

If
 
Actually, Windows with Vista is following Unix (Mac OS X) and Linux with the
new permissions feature. OS X has had this since version 10.0.
 
Back
Top