User Account Control in Vista -- comments. - Firewalls

This is a discussion on User Account Control in Vista -- comments. - Firewalls ; Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

  1. User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?

  2. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Mr. Arnold wrote:

    > Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?



    Hm... this feature's implementation sucks, but Vista sucks anyway?

  3. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    On May 6, 6:23 pm, "Mr. Arnold" wrote:
    > Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?


    Vista is a nice looking, nice feeling OS.... if the following are
    met...

    Turn off UAC...
    Unplug computer from AC Power...
    Throw power cord to computer away...
    Cut power cord into 2 peices, approx. 2 feet each.

    I find that utilizing these 2 steps and Vista becomes a much easier OS
    to deal with....

    RedForeman.


  4. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.


    "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    news:5a8atpF2n27l8U1@mid.dfncis.de...
    > Mr. Arnold wrote:
    >
    >> Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?

    >
    >
    > Hm... this feature's implementation sucks, but Vista sucks anyway?


    You want to come up with some reasons here?

    Actually, I like Vista better than any of the NT based O/S(s) for
    workstations. I also think that Vista is more secure than any of the
    previous versions of the NT based O/S(s) for the workstation out of the box
    setup.

    But that's just me.

    Yeah, I here the whine about Vista sucks, but I heard the same whine about
    Win 2k and XP sucked too, when they were released, but I guess that's just
    Human nature of the negative thinking Human Being, that has nothing good to
    say about anything.



  5. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Mr. Arnold wrote:

    > "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    > news:5a8atpF2n27l8U1@mid.dfncis.de...
    >> Mr. Arnold wrote:
    >>
    >>> Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?

    >>
    >> Hm... this feature's implementation sucks, but Vista sucks anyway?

    >
    > You want to come up with some reasons here?



    Implementation of UAC sucks:

    - no caching of credentials. Applications wants do A, you enter credentials.
    It wants to do B then, you have to enter them again. And again and again and
    again.
    - legacy program detection hinders you. You application setup is named
    setup.exe? UAC will be forced on you. No way to specify "No, damn, this
    setup runs fine under a non-admin user, so let me run it as such".
    - Vulnerable to spoofing (this is shared with many Unix sudo variants
    though). What exactly stops an application from taking a screenshot of the
    desktop, grey it out, draw this on the desktop and then open its own prompt,
    looking identical to the UAC thing? If UAC would f.e. put a logo on the
    screen that tells the user "hey, here, I'm the real UAC, because only I can
    know this logo that you provided at installation time". Keep in mind that
    Ctrl+Alt+Del focus capture can be subverted via DirectX or OpenGL.

    Well, all these can be and hopefully will be corrected.

    Vista sucks:

    - DRM integrated in the kernel. And please don't come up with the myths of
    only working passively and only on DRMed media - the implementation tells a
    different thing.
    - PatchGuard. Not just a stupid censorship to keep out open source project,
    but also a very dirty kernel hack that makes the system more bloated and
    less stable.
    - Explorer spoofing. Due to this nice localization feature, you can present
    a file as whatever you want. Um, hello, Microsoft, this is a serious
    vulnerability, when will you release a patch?
    - Removal of many good features, f.e. TCP/IP over FireWire, total crippling
    of various other features (Raw Sockets...).
    - A lot of bloat, f.e. DirectX Media Foundation.
    - Most security features suck and cannot be replaced by serious alternatives
    (f.e. ASLR with low entropy).

    > Actually, I like Vista better than any of the NT based O/S(s) for
    > workstations. I also think that Vista is more secure than any of the
    > previous versions of the NT based O/S(s) for the workstation out of the box
    > setup.



    Did you ever take Windows Server 2003 in comparison? Most of the
    improvements in Vista over Windows XP can already be found there. And
    indeed, the rest of the "improvements" really sucks.

    > Yeah, I here the whine about Vista sucks, but I heard the same whine about
    > Win 2k and XP sucked too, when they were released, but I guess that's just
    > Human nature of the negative thinking Human Being, that has nothing good to
    > say about anything.


    Hm... Windows XP RTM really sucked in comparison over Windows 2000 SP2. Just
    like Windows 2000 itself sucked until SP2 (but got at least a bit better in
    SP1).

  6. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.


    "RedForeman" wrote in message
    news:1178546396.916685.255150@h2g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
    > On May 6, 6:23 pm, "Mr. Arnold" wrote:
    >> Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?

    >
    > Vista is a nice looking, nice feeling OS.... if the following are
    > met...
    >
    > Turn off UAC...
    > Unplug computer from AC Power...
    > Throw power cord to computer away...
    > Cut power cord into 2 peices, approx. 2 feet each.
    >
    > I find that utilizing these 2 steps and Vista becomes a much easier OS
    > to deal with....
    >
    > RedForeman.
    >


    Nonsense, I'll have to say that you don't anymore know what you're talking
    about than the man in the Moon. You have no *clue* about Vista.


  7. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.


    "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    news:5a8ujkF2nb9ojU1@mid.dfncis.de...
    > Mr. Arnold wrote:
    >
    >> "Sebastian G." wrote in message
    >> news:5a8atpF2n27l8U1@mid.dfncis.de...
    >>> Mr. Arnold wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?
    >>>
    >>> Hm... this feature's implementation sucks, but Vista sucks anyway?

    >>
    >> You want to come up with some reasons here?

    >
    >
    > Implementation of UAC sucks:
    >
    > - no caching of credentials. Applications wants do A, you enter
    > credentials. It wants to do B then, you have to enter them again. And
    > again and again and again.


    I have not encounted that, so you must be reading this and you really have
    not put it to the test. Yes, it's ask for permission every now and then, but
    it has not aksed at the level you're talking about.

    > - legacy program detection hinders you. You application setup is named
    > setup.exe? UAC will be forced on you. No way to specify "No, damn, this
    > setup runs fine under a non-admin user, so let me run it as such".
    > - Vulnerable to spoofing (this is shared with many Unix sudo variants
    > though). What exactly stops an application from taking a screenshot of the
    > desktop, grey it out, draw this on the desktop and then open its own
    > prompt, looking identical to the UAC thing? If UAC would f.e. put a logo
    > on the screen that tells the user "hey, here, I'm the real UAC, because
    > only I can know this logo that you provided at installation time". Keep in
    > mind that Ctrl+Alt+Del focus capture can be subverted via DirectX or
    > OpenGL.
    >
    >


    Well, all these can hopefully will be corrected. Nothing is perfect and it
    never will be perfect as long as Human Beings are invloved in it. Those are
    the facts.

    >
    > Vista sucks:
    >
    > - DRM integrated in the kernel. And please don't come up with the myths of
    > only working passively and only on DRMed media - the implementation tells
    > a different thing.


    I could care less about it, because it's not affecting my enjoyment of using
    the O/S.

    > - PatchGuard. Not just a stupid censorship to keep out open source
    > project, but also a very dirty kernel hack that makes the system more
    > bloated and less stable.


    The only thing I have seen is users installing Vista on machines not Vista
    approved causing problems for them.

    > - Explorer spoofing. Due to this nice localization feature, you can
    > present a file as whatever you want. Um, hello, Microsoft, this is a
    > serious vulnerability, when will you release a patch?


    And this is not on any previous version of the NT based O/S?

    > - Removal of many good features, f.e. TCP/IP over FireWire, total
    > crippling of various other features (Raw Sockets...).


    It doesn't seem to affect my enjoyment of using the Vista O/S.

    > - A lot of bloat, f.e. DirectX Media Foundation.


    What you see as bloat may be to some others OK. Again, it has not deminished
    my enjoyment of using this O/S on an entertainment laptop.

    > - Most security features suck and cannot be replaced by serious
    > alternatives (f.e. ASLR with low entropy).


    It is what it is and one deals with it, just like one deals with it with any
    previous version of the NT based O/S, if one knows what he or she is doing.
    >
    >> Actually, I like Vista better than any of the NT based O/S(s) for
    >> workstations. I also think that Vista is more secure than any of the
    >> previous versions of the NT based O/S(s) for the workstation out of the
    >> box setup.

    >
    >
    > Did you ever take Windows Server 2003 in comparison? Most of the
    > improvements in Vista over Windows XP can already be found there. And
    > indeed, the rest of the "improvements" really sucks.


    No one for the most part is going to be running Win 2K3 server. I didn't see
    Win 2k3 server being offered on any laptop or desktop I looked at when
    shopping for a new laptop. And the fact that the improvments in Vista that
    are also present in Win 2K3 are not present on any other NT workstaion based
    O/S is a good thing.

    And what other improvments are you talking about that suck, because what I
    have seen of Vista to this point, what you are saying makes no sense.

    Again, the same things were being said about Win 2K pro, XP pro and XP home,
    when those O/S(s) were released.

    >
    >> Yeah, I here the whine about Vista sucks, but I heard the same whine
    >> about Win 2k and XP sucked too, when they were released, but I guess
    >> that's just Human nature of the negative thinking Human Being, that has
    >> nothing good to say about anything.

    >
    > Hm... Windows XP RTM really sucked in comparison over Windows 2000 SP2.
    > Just like Windows 2000 itself sucked until SP2 (but got at least a bit
    > better in SP1).


    Well, la de da, as long as there are improvements, it can't be ignored or
    dismissed.

    I am happy with Vista, and like I said, I like it better that any of the
    previous NT based O/S(s) for the workstation I have used. The includes the
    home and work environments.

    When you piss on something, just make sure you're not standing up wind.

    It's much to do about nothing and Vista is just another NT based O/S that's
    on the market and people are and will be using it, no doubt about it.

    I very well expected you to respond and you're true to form as always, bless
    your little negative heart.


  8. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Mr. Arnold wrote:


    >> - DRM integrated in the kernel. And please don't come up with the myths of
    >> only working passively and only on DRMed media - the implementation tells
    >> a different thing.

    >
    > I could care less about it, because it's not affecting my enjoyment of using
    > the O/S.



    You'd wish. But it is designed and most likely will hinder you in the one or
    other way. A typical example is a DirectShow-based video editing
    application, which will exhibit various limitations when encountering the
    DRM filtering drivers on enumeration.
    DRM also is a privilege escalation vulnerability. Just specify a license
    "revoke after: 1 second, action on revocation: delete license (C:\*.dll
    recursively)".

    >> - Explorer spoofing. Due to this nice localization feature, you can
    >> present a file as whatever you want. Um, hello, Microsoft, this is a
    >> serious vulnerability, when will you release a patch?

    >
    > And this is not on any previous version of the NT based O/S?



    No, since the problem is with this specific implementation.

    >> - A lot of bloat, f.e. DirectX Media Foundation.

    >
    > What you see as bloat may be to some others OK. Again, it has not deminished
    > my enjoyment of using this O/S on an entertainment laptop.



    Seems like you're not a gamer. The Media Foundation Usermode Service often
    interrupts about any time-critical process.

    >> - Most security features suck and cannot be replaced by serious
    >> alternatives (f.e. ASLR with low entropy).

    >
    > It is what it is and one deals with it, just like one deals with it with any
    > previous version of the NT based O/S, if one knows what he or she is doing.



    At the current state of implementation, ASLR in Windows Vista is worthless.

    > Well, la de da, as long as there are improvements, it can't be ignored or
    > dismissed.



    It can. Trivially. Since almost anything else is rather a deprovement,
    making the minor improvements rather worthless.

    I just wonder: Can you name me any serious or just noticeable improvement in
    Windows Vista that cannot easily be decredited? OK, one beside DirectX 10?

    > I am happy with Vista, and like I said, I like it better that any of the
    > previous NT based O/S(s) for the workstation I have used. The includes the
    > home and work environments.



    Yeah, happiness really is an argument, and technical facts are unimportant.

    > It's much to do about nothing and Vista is just another NT based O/S that's
    > on the market and people are and will be using it, no doubt about it.



    Which translates to: They'll take whatever crappy software we'll give'em. As
    proven by experience.

  9. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    I didn't even bother to read it.

    It's time for you to disappear SG, because as always, you'll run it into the
    ground trying to give you negative view on things.

    Like I told you before, if it was a clear blue beautiful sunny day, about 76
    degrees with a nice breeze and a summer day, that would beautiful for most.

    But for you it be a bad day.



  10. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Mr. Arnold wrote:

    > I didn't even bother to read it.
    >
    > It's time for you to disappear SG, because as always, you'll run it into the
    > ground trying to give you negative view on things.
    >
    > Like I told you before, if it was a clear blue beautiful sunny day, about 76
    > degrees with a nice breeze and a summer day, that would beautiful for most.
    >
    > But for you it be a bad day.



    Can't you write "I'm ignoring everyone and everything telling me the bad
    side of things because they're bad and I don't want to hear them." much shorter?

  11. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Mr. Arnold, may I top post, to point you to a few things of note....

    > > On May 6, 6:23 pm, "Mr. Arnold" wrote:
    > >> Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?



    Here I replied with my opinion...
    > > Vista is a nice looking, nice feeling OS.... if the following are
    > > met...

    >
    > > Turn off UAC...
    > > Unplug computer from AC Power...
    > > Throw power cord to computer away...
    > > Cut power cord into 2 peices, approx. 2 feet each.

    >
    > > I find that utilizing these 2 steps and Vista becomes a much easier OS
    > > to deal with....

    >
    > > RedForeman.



    Here, you interjected as if it was a yes/no question and I asked you
    another question... thus, you not liking the answer you recieved...
    > Nonsense, I'll have to say that you don't anymore know what you're talking
    > about than the man in the Moon. You have no *clue* about Vista.


    well, I may not... but I guess the certifications and student loans
    say otherwise...

    Maybe if you had just started off by saying that you like it and
    anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong... then I would have just ignored
    your post and continued on... my bad, didn't mean to have an opinion
    on a one sided conversation....

    I'll be on my way....

    Have a great day....

    RedForeman



  12. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    >
    > Here, you interjected as if it was a yes/no question and I asked you
    > another question... thus, you not liking the answer you recieved...


    I asked for comments on one thing and one thing only and you needed to run
    your mouth in addidtion to that. And on top of that, you never gave any
    reason about the topic of the post other than trun it off and unplug the
    computer.

    Thus, you got my response.

    >> Nonsense, I'll have to say that you don't anymore know what you're
    >> talking
    >> about than the man in the Moon. You have no *clue* about Vista.

    >
    > well, I may not... but I guess the certifications and student loans
    > say otherwise...
    >


    I got certifications and loans myself, big deal.

    > Maybe if you had just started off by saying that you like it and
    > anyone who thinks otherwise is wrong... then I would have just ignored
    > your post and continued on... my bad, didn't mean to have an opinion
    > on a one sided conversation....


    And what makes you right?
    >
    > I'll be on my way....


    Do that and take your negativity with you, with someting I would suspect you
    have not used.

    >
    > Have a great day....
    >


    You do the same.


  13. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.



    I didn't ask you to start going to left field. You took that upon yourself
    to do that.


  14. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    On May 7, 2:41 pm, "Mr. Arnold" wrote:
    > You do the same.


    I do apologize for wandering off into left field... I tend to do that
    on mondays...

    Let's start over...

    You asked: "Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or
    con? "

    My only problem with UAC is that it can be turned on and off...to me,
    that is a con.

    ....go ahead... ask me why?? Then, maybe then, we could have a 2-sided
    conversation... not just a RF'favorable-only'C....

    ;-)

    RedForeman


  15. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.


    "Mr. Arnold" Arnold@Arnold.com> wrote in message
    news:_zs%h.8668$j63.4361@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
    > Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?


    Personally I have no issues with UAC. Try this article:
    http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...really-is.aspx
    for an in depth viewpoint from one of Microsoft's ex security specialists.

    Wayne McGlinn
    Brisbane, Oz



  16. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    On May 8, 3:56 am, "Wayne" wrote:
    > "Mr. Arnold" wrote in messagenews:_zs%h.8668$j63.4361@newsread2.news.pas .earthlink.net...
    >
    > > Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?

    >
    > Personally I have no issues with UAC. Try this article:http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...01/confusion-a...
    > for an in depth viewpoint from one of Microsoft's ex security specialists.
    >
    > Wayne McGlinn
    > Brisbane, Oz


    But it's biased as long as it'a former, an ex, an anything that has to
    do with microsoft...

    Good article though....

    RedForeman


  17. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.


    "Wayne" wrote in message
    news:46402d7c$0$497$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au...
    >
    > "Mr. Arnold" Arnold@Arnold.com> wrote in message
    > news:_zs%h.8668$j63.4361@newsread2.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
    >> Anyone have any comments on this feature in Vista pro or con?

    >
    > Personally I have no issues with UAC. Try this article:
    > http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...really-is.aspx
    > for an in depth viewpoint from one of Microsoft's ex security specialists.
    >


    Thanks this is what I was looking for and not the nonsense from others that
    I got.

    Thanks


  18. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    Mr. Arnold wrote:


    > Thanks this is what I was looking for and not the nonsense from others that
    > I got.



    Translation: I really didn't want to start any discussion. I just wanted to
    hear what I like to hear.

    Unfortunately, Usenet is a discussion medium...

  19. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.



    You can translate this. They need to lock you up and throw away the key, a
    life sentence.

    There should be no way for to be released back into society.

    And of course, with you being locked up, you would consider that to be a
    positive for yourself.



  20. Re: User Account Control in Vista -- comments.

    On 5/7/2007 2:07:26 PM, RedForeman wrote:
    > On May 7, 2:41 pm, "Mr. Arnold" wrote:
    >> You do the same.

    >
    > > My only problem with UAC is that it can be turned on and off...to me,

    > that is a con.
    >


    The user can turn it off, without being an Admin??

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast