UAC Views

  • Thread starter Thread starter PowerUser
  • Start date Start date
P

PowerUser

**A big IMHO here**

If you generally know what you're doing, and as I presume, if Vista is at
least as secure as XP is right now, you don't need UAC. It simply wastes
time and frustrates, IMO.

And we know that this is by no means the end of viruses, no matter what MS
would like to have us believe.

A third party FW like ZA Free is all I need to keep my XP system safe, and I
think it'd be the same with Vista.
 
**A big IMHO here**

If you generally know what you're doing, and as I presume, if Vista is at
least as secure as XP is right now, you don't need UAC. It simply wastes
time and frustrates, IMO.

And we know that this is by no means the end of viruses, no matter what MS
would like to have us believe.

A third party FW like ZA Free is all I need to keep my XP system safe, and I
think it'd be the same with Vista.
Oh dear...

A Firewall doesn't protect you against a malicious activeX plugin.

--
Conor

I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.

Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
 
I don't use IE.

**A big IMHO here**

If you generally know what you're doing, and as I presume, if Vista is at
least as secure as XP is right now, you don't need UAC. It simply wastes
time and frustrates, IMO.

And we know that this is by no means the end of viruses, no matter what MS
would like to have us believe.

A third party FW like ZA Free is all I need to keep my XP system safe, and
I
think it'd be the same with Vista.
Oh dear...

A Firewall doesn't protect you against a malicious activeX plugin.

--
Conor

I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.

Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
 
That's what you need. An AV kick in when you've already made a mistake,
doesn't it?

I've not had a virus for years- Heck the last time I had one, I had
installed it intentionally 8-) UAC just seems to exacerbate accessibility,
and as mentioned in another thread, one can very easily click through the
prompt unconsciously just to get over with it- Making it of little use

I don't use IE.
....or any other browser exploit.

The only thing a Firewall protects you against is someone trying to
open a connection to your PC from the internet and programs making
outbound connections.

--
Conor

I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.

Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
 
Have you ever used any other OS besides Windows? Windows is one of the very
few OSs where users regularly logon with root/administrator access. This is
one of the reasons malware authors target Windows. It's a big target.
Running with lower privileges reduces the size of the target.
 
I have used other OSes, but I haven't ever seen anywhere near the number of
prompts that I've seen in Vista. The concept of requiring authorization is
good in theory but like I said if a user simply clicks through the prompts-
Which I know the majority do- Little is achieved.
 
PowerUser said:
I have used other OSes, but I haven't ever seen anywhere near the number of
prompts that I've seen in Vista. The concept of requiring authorization is
good in theory but like I said if a user simply clicks through the prompts-
Which I know the majority do- Little is achieved.
UAC is a corp knee jerk reaction by MS. It will create more problems,
confusion and plain'ol bad public relations for MS than practically
anything they've done in the past, especially if you're a newbie or just
not really "computer savvy".
If you're computer knowledgeable, UAC will irritate the hell out of you.
If you really know what you're doing, UAC will be the very first app you
disable.
Frank
 
PowerUser said:
**A big IMHO here**

If you generally know what you're doing, and as I presume, if Vista is at
least as secure as XP is right now, you don't need UAC. It simply wastes
time and frustrates, IMO.

And we know that this is by no means the end of viruses, no matter what MS
would like to have us believe.

A third party FW like ZA Free is all I need to keep my XP system safe, and
I think it'd be the same with Vista.

A software firewall such as Zone Alarm is only one part of a security in
depth approach. Software firewalls can be disabled, negated, or bypassed.
Don't be putting too much faith in your Zone Alarm. It takes a variety of
steps to keep a system safe. I do get a chuckle when people pound their
chest and say how good they are at keeping their system safe. Especially
when their main support in that allegation is a reliance on a free software
firewall. A software firewall is useful but it's not everything.
 
"Frank"wrote
UAC is a corp knee jerk reaction by MS. It will create more problems,
confusion and plain'ol bad public relations for MS than practically
anything they've done in the past, especially if you're a newbie or just
not really "computer savvy".
If you're computer knowledgeable, UAC will irritate the hell out of you.
If you really know what you're doing, UAC will be the very first app you
disable.
Frank

I'm computer knowledgeable, and UAC doesn't irritate the hell out of me, nor
have I disabled it. I've learned how to work with it. It's a paradigm
shift in how to use the system. UAC will have a learning curve. Yes, it
will keep us busy on the newsgroups, but it will increase security for the
average and even above average user. Those that turn it off will be in the
same state they are now. Those that keep it on and learn how to work with
it will be better off.
 
Rock wrote:
Those
that turn it off will be in the same state they are now. Those that
keep it on and learn how to work with it will be better off.

Sorry Rock, but I and countless others don't need to be trained by an
overbearing obnoxious app nor do we intend to become its slave.
It a POS (IMO).
Frank
 
Rock wrote:
Those

Sorry Rock, but I and countless others don't need to be trained by an
overbearing obnoxious app nor do we intend to become its slave.
It a POS (IMO).
Frank


I'm not challenging your opinion of it; I disagree with the overarching
statement about what competent computer people will do. Who are these
countless others? I have heard a vocal few. I don't see that amounts to
countless others, but however that is quantified, it sure doesn't support a
statement that "If you really know what you're doing, UAC will be the first
app you disable." Security in depth has many components. I think it's
more likely that competent computer users will disable UAC when there is a
strong need, and keep it enabled otherwise. Only the future will decide
which becomes true.
 
Rock said:
I'm not challenging your opinion of it; I disagree with the
overarching statement about what competent computer people will do. Who
are these countless others? I have heard a vocal few. I don't
see that amounts to countless others, but however that is quantified,
it sure doesn't support a statement that "If you really know what
you're doing, UAC will be the first app you disable." Security in
depth has many components. I think it's more likely that competent
computer users will disable UAC when there is a strong need, and keep
it enabled otherwise. Only the future will decide which becomes true.

I agree completely. Competent computer users understand the need for
security and use it. They don't let their ego get in the way.
 
Kerry Brown said:
I agree completely. Competent computer users understand the need for security and use it.
They don't let their ego get in the way.

"Ego"? What a load of crap. I reckon, that's an expected comment
from Microsoft lackeys.

If it was about "ego", then I'd bet most of us wouldn't run an AV, a firewall,
use a router, make sure they keep their machines updated, or use
spyware protection. No, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with
the fact that UAC is a completely distracting, obtrusive, and extremely
annoying "feature"- as annoying as any pop-up advertising that once
plagued users. Luckily, this fearware can be turned off.


-Michael
 
Kerry said:
I agree completely. Competent computer users understand the need for
security and use it. They don't let their ego get in the way.

Ok, just ask yourself a few simple questions:
1) has my computer/network security hardware/software firewall been
compromised over the last 15 yrs?
2) has my computer/network been infected by any virus or trojan horse
over the last 15 yrs?

In my case-no. I run hardware and software firewalls, anti-virus and
internet security software.
So why do I need to be irritated, trained and become a slave to UAC?
Simple answer-I don't.
Do you?
Frank
 
MICHAEL said:
"Ego"? What a load of crap. I reckon, that's an expected comment
from Microsoft lackeys.

If it was about "ego", then I'd bet most of us wouldn't run an AV, a
firewall, use a router, make sure they keep their machines updated,
or use spyware protection. No, it couldn't possibly have anything to do
with
the fact that UAC is a completely distracting, obtrusive, and
extremely annoying "feature"- as annoying as any pop-up advertising
that once plagued users. Luckily, this fearware can be turned off.


-Michael

If you use Vista as a standard user then it works very similar to other OSs.
If you insist on running as an administrator then yes your ego is in the
way. Do you run Linux as root?
 
Frank said:
Ok, just ask yourself a few simple questions:
1) has my computer/network security hardware/software firewall been
compromised over the last 15 yrs?
2) has my computer/network been infected by any virus or trojan horse
over the last 15 yrs?

In my case-no. I run hardware and software firewalls, anti-virus and
internet security software.
So why do I need to be irritated, trained and become a slave to UAC?
Simple answer-I don't.
Do you?
Frank

Why do you need to run as administrator. Do you run Linux as root?
 
Kerry Brown said:
If you use Vista as a standard user then it works very similar to other OSs. If you insist on
running as an administrator then yes your ego is in the way. Do you run Linux as root?

Who in Hades said anything about Linux?

I don't give a shite what Linux does or doesn't do-
none, nada, zip.

It's your ego that demands we accept being
inconvenienced and annoyed because it's in our
own interest. "It is for our own safety"- there's
been a few monopolies and two bit dictators who
have the same sort of response.

Microsoft has simply moved from one extreme to
the other. Which will lead it back to where it was
before- because after many users turn UAC off,
it will be just like XP. Which is fine with me, but
Microsoft will have accomplished nothing. Users
will turn it off, unless Microsoft makes some changes
to the obnoxiousness of UAC. I guarantee you.


-Michael
 
MICHAEL said:
Who in Hades said anything about Linux?

I don't give a shite what Linux does or doesn't do-
none, nada, zip.

It's your ego that demands we accept being
inconvenienced and annoyed because it's in our
own interest. "It is for our own safety"- there's
been a few monopolies and two bit dictators who
have the same sort of response.

Microsoft has simply moved from one extreme to
the other. Which will lead it back to where it was
before- because after many users turn UAC off,
it will be just like XP. Which is fine with me, but
Microsoft will have accomplished nothing. Users
will turn it off, unless Microsoft makes some changes
to the obnoxiousness of UAC. I guarantee you.


-Michael

I was using Linux as an example. Linux is generally regarded as more secure
than Windows. Only foolish users run Linux as root. They are generally
scorned by most in the Linux community. When using almost all OSs other than
Windows no one uses a root/administrator user for every day use. It is time
for Windows users to join the rest of the world. Even if you have all the
best protection, firewalls, anti-malware, turn off services, whatever, there
exists the possibility of a zero day exploit hitting you. The .wmf and .vml
exploits prove this. Running with lower privileges mitigates the problem to
a very large degree. The world is full of compromises which one must accept
in the name of risk management. Do you ride a motorcycle with no helmet,
drive your car with no seat belt, or jump out of airplanes with no
parachute? Each of us has an ego. Our ego determines what risks we will
accept. When the risks that you take affects people other than yourself then
other people have a right to object. Windows users have been the scourge of
the Internet and caused untold problems and financial losses because they
run with administrator privileges all the time. How many botnets of Linux or
OS X do you see? If their users ran as root they would be exploitable just
like Windows. Microsoft is as much to blame as the users because they have
fostered this culture. Vista is an attempt to fix it. With Vista you have
just as much control as you ever had with Windows. How you access and use
that control is different. The easiest way to keep the built in security and
not be annoyed is to run as a standard user. When you need elevated
privileges use "Run as administrator". You will have to enter a password
once then the task will run without repeated UAC prompts, very much like
other "more secure" OSs. Occasionally you will need to do some maintenance
that would be easier logged in as administrator. Reboot into safe made with
an administrator account. This is the way the rest of the computing world
works. If Windows doesn't change to this or a very similar model malware
will only get worse and eventually everyone will switch to an OS that does
use this model.
 
Back
Top