Great postI just found it (again) while doing a google search on UAC
Good to know
Now if only we can get the false "Get a Mac" ads to redirect to here......
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Vista, Admin rights, UAC, and You
- Thread starter bbz_Ghost
- Start date
Good to know
Now if only we can get the false "Get a Mac" ads to redirect to here......
ROFL there are so many corners cut in that post that it can be described as a ball by now.
UAC is lame. UAC is not a solution. Killing program files is not a solution.
MS typical response to a security problem is to disable the whole feature (look at email attachments - instead of patching the vulnerability they set default to stop people from opening 'unsafe' files i.e. rendering e-mail attachments unoperable instead of actually fixing the problem itself). So now MS decided to break legacy apps IF they got installed to program files subfolders (which by itself should not be dangerous at all since SYSTEM files do not reside in said subfolders). So in essence people can still install whatever they like outside of program files and cause the exact same problems (mixed dll's etc). In fact this is inevitable if and when people actually (God forbid) want to use some APPLICATIONS in their operating system. Hell one would think they wet their pants only from the OS right? Like some f.a.n. material here?
Since UAC pops up every time a user accesses program files or desktop icon or whatever trivial, people will develop an automation to click accept to the prompts in 1 day (or like most, disable the nagging POS to begin with). UAC is so committing suicide in a couple days. So instead of a solution they created an annoyance with zero benefits.
Now what about this much touted 'genius' of virtualizing files to user profiles.. This happens without the knowledge or consent of the end-user. Several mission critical files get virtualized completely occluded to the user. So the user sees the original files residing in default app locations but in reality he's not accessing them but something else.
What happens when the user modifies the said files? The changes do _not_ reflect to the application. What happens when autopatch tries to update the application? Yep, you guessed right, it updates the files in the wrong location. So there's yet another thing MS broke while trying to limp a solution to the security problems.
UAC should be renamed LAME.
UAC is lame. UAC is not a solution. Killing program files is not a solution.
MS typical response to a security problem is to disable the whole feature (look at email attachments - instead of patching the vulnerability they set default to stop people from opening 'unsafe' files i.e. rendering e-mail attachments unoperable instead of actually fixing the problem itself). So now MS decided to break legacy apps IF they got installed to program files subfolders (which by itself should not be dangerous at all since SYSTEM files do not reside in said subfolders). So in essence people can still install whatever they like outside of program files and cause the exact same problems (mixed dll's etc). In fact this is inevitable if and when people actually (God forbid) want to use some APPLICATIONS in their operating system. Hell one would think they wet their pants only from the OS right? Like some f.a.n. material here?
Since UAC pops up every time a user accesses program files or desktop icon or whatever trivial, people will develop an automation to click accept to the prompts in 1 day (or like most, disable the nagging POS to begin with). UAC is so committing suicide in a couple days. So instead of a solution they created an annoyance with zero benefits.
Now what about this much touted 'genius' of virtualizing files to user profiles.. This happens without the knowledge or consent of the end-user. Several mission critical files get virtualized completely occluded to the user. So the user sees the original files residing in default app locations but in reality he's not accessing them but something else.
What happens when the user modifies the said files? The changes do _not_ reflect to the application. What happens when autopatch tries to update the application? Yep, you guessed right, it updates the files in the wrong location. So there's yet another thing MS broke while trying to limp a solution to the security problems.
UAC should be renamed LAME.