User Acount Control

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I have had about enough of this stupid feature.
It keeps my antivirus stuff from running at startup, and it annoys me to no
end.
I tried to turn it off, but it gave me a scary warning that bad things would
happen if I did.

Now, my question...
What are the real harms to disableing that stupid feature, and if they realy
are that bad, how can I configure it not to be so dumb?
 
now, you could take this a step further. why are you using a firewall? and
why an antivirus program? isn't it annoying to have to install these to be
safer? you may be safe for a while without them. But can you be sure it will
stay this way?

so why not have another layer of security on top of this which will prevent
programs from installing without permission?

I personally like the idea that anything that tries to install something is
asked for permission. It sure is annoying, but it is extremely annoying to
get rid of 25 ad/spy ware programs that unintentionally installed onto your
PC in the background.

It's annoying to lock my bike when I leave it somewhere. some people get
even used to taking their tires off to prevent stealing. It's up to you. but
you cannot blame anybody for a not secure enough OS if you turn it off.

and yes, there are programs who can turn off this feature, but only with
your permission.

another layer of security will certainly be better for most of users. If you
feel comfortable enough that you can do without it, you may turn it off.
Nothing may happen to you.
 
Hilmar,
Hi,
a little comment.
This is part of what you say about uac.
" It sure is annoying, but it is extremely annoying to
get rid of 25 ad/spy ware programs that unintentionally installed onto
your PC in the background."
Click to expand...
Last time I ran Adaware; it found adware;with UAC on; BTW
So what does UAC have to do with stopping adware?

Jeff

"
 
how can I configure it not to be so dumb?
Click to expand...

U got a point there. An "always allow" function for certain processes would
be necessarry to keep UAC enabled here.
The balance between security and usability is completely lost.
 
Jeff said:
Hilmar,
Hi,
a little comment.
This is part of what you say about uac.
" It sure is annoying, but it is extremely annoying to
Last time I ran Adaware; it found adware;with UAC on; BTW
So what does UAC have to do with stopping adware?
Click to expand...

This is interesting. What Adware did it find, exactly?
 
And;
I'm careful too Robert;so I usually get get cookies only;to begin with;
UAC or no UAC;
Jeff
P.S. Not nice to call someone out; exactly

Jeff
 
I would love to see something like that...
It would make UAC much more bare-able...
I shall refraise my question....

If I turn of UAC, will my computer be in any more danger than it was with XP?
 
Jeff said:
And;
I'm careful too Robert;so I usually get get cookies only;to begin with;
UAC or no UAC;
Jeff
P.S. Not nice to call someone out; exactly
Click to expand...

Well I'm sorry you feel that being asked "What adware exactly" was being
'called out'.

Rightly or wrongly (rightly in my opinion but I accept others may disagree)
Windows UAC will not look at cookies for the simple reason these are not
software.

Cookies are (as I'm sure you know) simply small text files stored on your
computer by websites you visit to track state on that site or family of
sites. As such they are not software; at no time during the placing or
reading of a cookie is unauthorised malicious code executed on your
computer. As such, UAC doesn't look worry about these because it considers
them to be irrelevant.

Now you may question that design decision, but considering UAC to be remiss
because it didn't block a cookie is a little like considering an iPod to be
a poor MP3 player because you can't climb inside it and drive it to work.
 
Matthileo said:
I would love to see something like that...
It would make UAC much more bare-able...
I shall refraise my question....

If I turn of UAC, will my computer be in any more danger than it was with
XP?
Click to expand...

Certainly not. Still not sure I'd advise doing it though. As broken as UAC
is in places, it's a big improvement on not having it at all.
 
Ahh,
We could go round and round about cookies Robert.
However; the simple fact that you do not consider cookies spyware;does not
alter the fact that; anything put on my pc without my explicit consent;is in
my opinion;spyware.executable or not.
Malicious? Hmmm; invading my privacy;tracking ANYTHING about me;without
my consent; IS spyware.
Because MSFT and people choose not to see this as spyware; is the exact
reason programs like Adaware are in existence.
Granted; Vista is doing a good job; so far. Won't be that way for long;
I fear.
And; sorry;just a tad annoyed this morning;didn't mean to take it out on
you.
Have seen reg edit spyware in 5384 with Adaware; although;I freely
admit;not on my own p.c. ; as I try dilligiently to keep my AV and
protection;the best it can be.
Vista is a major improvement;but again;nothing is or ever will be
inpenetrable. UAC or not.
Jeff
P.S. Wonder if you'll be able to drive Zune to work??? LOL :-)

And;not that I have had any;nor do I wish any spyware on anyone; I have
seen more than ad cookies.
 
Jeff said:
Ahh,
We could go round and round about cookies Robert.
However; the simple fact that you do not consider cookies spyware;does not
alter the fact that; anything put on my pc without my explicit consent;is
in my opinion;spyware.executable or not.
Malicious? Hmmm; invading my privacy;tracking ANYTHING about me;without
my consent; IS spyware.
Click to expand...

It's certainly an invasion of privacy. And Cookies can be a privacy concern,
but UAC concerns itself with a particular technical problem and cookies
don't fall within it's remit. You'll be wanting to lambast Windows defender
about that one - and they'd tell you it was a design choice. As I say, it's
a matter of opinion, and while my opinion is different to yours, I know that
doesn't make one of us "right" and the other "wrong", and it's why we need
choices in what programs we work with (as you also said), so you can worry
about cookies and nuke them with AdAware and I can not worry about them and
not have my computer waste resources on them with Defender.

Have seen reg edit spyware in 5384 with Adaware; although;I freely
admit;not on my own p.c. ; as I try dilligiently to keep my AV and
protection;the best it can be.
Vista is a major improvement;but again;nothing is or ever will be
inpenetrable. UAC or not.
Click to expand...

Indeed. But UAC is an attempt to move in the right direction. I can spend a
long time criticising it on a number of issues, but it's better than not
having anything like UAC at all.
Jeff
P.S. Wonder if you'll be able to drive Zune to work??? LOL :-)
Click to expand...

Don't even get me started on Zune. I might be a MVP but they'll have to
kill me first if they want to take my Apple Mac laptop or my iPod off me.
 
UAC has come a long way since beta 2. I use Avast antivirus program and it does not cause a problem on normal accounts. Maybe I can suggest trying this program. As far as shutting off UAC, I do not recommend it. I recommend sending feedback to Microsoft with any issues you may be having with the programs you are running. That is the only way to make UAC better by RTM.

--
Jason

Windows Vista RC1 Build 5600 & 5728
MS Office 2007 B2TR
I have had about enough of this stupid feature.
It keeps my antivirus stuff from running at startup, and it annoys me to no
end.
I tried to turn it off, but it gave me a scary warning that bad things would
happen if I did.

Now, my question...
What are the real harms to disableing that stupid feature, and if they realy
are that bad, how can I configure it not to be so dumb?
 
Hello,

UAC is a tool that allows you to decide which programs will run with
"administrator" access to your computer. Programs with this kind of power
can do anything they want to your computer.

With UAC enabled, NO program can have this kind of power unless you give it
to them thru a UAC dialog. Obviously, this does nothing to prevent spyware
in and of itself - but it does give YOU the power to stop programs that you
don't want to have supreme power over your computer from running.

You may think this is a big pain in the rear - and it is to a certain
extent - but realize that UAC doesn't just ask you for consent when YOU run
a program - it will ask you for consent when a program tries to run itself.
UAC gives you the chance to stop a program from running with admin power
that you didn't start - which is generally the case with spyware.

UAC is also the framework that allows other advanced security features of
Windows to work, such as Internet Explorer's protected mode.

By disabling UAC, you implicitly authorize every program that is run,
regardless of how it started, to have complete control over your computer.
This is why Windows complains so loudly when you turn it off - Windows wants
you to choose which programs have this power.

Disable at your own risk.
 
I don't understand getting a UAC prompt just to change the hotkey on an
application shortcut, and I don't understand having to say ok twice to do
it. How does one turn this off? I turned it off and then the stupid
annoying Red X came up to tell me I need to turn it back on. So now how do
I get rid of that? Thanks.
 
Back
Top