I turned off UAC

[Justin]

For various reasons I turned off UAC.
Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from warning
me constantly?

 

[semoi]

The UAC, as you realize, is utterly useless.
The concept of a warning is admirable. However the Vista UAC is simply a
blind prompt that gives no information about any potential threat and merely
pops up as result of user actions. Its aim is to make the user feel
responsible if something goes awry rather than blame the lazy ass
programming that goes into Windows.
Win7/Vista SP3 does not have the knee jerk UAC of Vista. Alas Win7/Vista SP3
retains, as far as I can see and have read, all the lazy ass programming
that makes Windows unnecessarily vulnerable to the evil a-holes of the
world.
The OS itself, whether Windows/Apple/Linux is rapidly becoming irrelevant in
a browser based, cloud computing world.
IBM may have the last laugh as it pushes a Linux based cloud computing model
to companies fed up with tithing Microsoft's endless and valueless upgrade
cycles.

 

[trigonometry1972]

For various reasons I turned off UAC.
Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from warning
me constantly?

Replace the OS with LInux. It worked for me.

Just trolling thru...............Trig

 

[Kayman]

For various reasons I turned off UAC.
Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from warning
me constantly?

Five Misunderstood Features in Windows Vista
¡E User Account Control
¡E Image management
¡E Display Driver Model
¡E Search
¡E 64 bit architecture
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...86-9661-49b1-87ce-6d4a39e83747&DisplayLang=en

The User Access Control (UAC) can detect rootkits before they install.
AV-Test.org carried on a test of common AV applications to find out how
good they detected rootkits. The examiner had to turn off UAC because it
detected every rootkit used in the test.

Avoiding Rootkit Infection.
"The rules to avoid rootkit infection are for the most part the same as
avoiding any malware infection however there are some special
considerations:
Because rootkits meddle with the operating system itself they *require*
full Administrator rights to install. Hence infection can be avoided by
running Windows from an account with *lesser* privileges" (LUA in XP and
UAC in Vista).

You should understand the reason why UAC is there. You should read about
the two access tokens for user/admin on Vista, and yes, if UAC is disabled,
then Run As Administrator is disabled too.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc709691.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc160882.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc138019.aspx

Now, listen to the experts and be guided accordingly!

Good luck

 

[Not Even Me]

Now, listen to the experts and be guided accordingly!
Good luck

Most users with a brain don't like the constant nagging of UAC.
As good as the idea may be, the implementation is so poor as to render it
useless.

 

[Mike Hall - MVP]

For various reasons I turned off UAC.
Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from warning
me constantly?

Go to Control Panel > Security Center..

Now click on 'Change the way Security Center alerts me'

 

[The Daily Abnormal]

For various reasons I turned off UAC.
Is there a way I can prevent that bubble in the lower right from warning
me constantly?

Replace the OS with LInux. It worked for me.

Just trolling thru...............Trig

The only reason it worked for you is you are too stupid to figure out Vista
so if you need to use something, you have to fall back on that inferior OS
piece of shit designed by geeks for geeks who can't get laid. Linux.

 

[Saucy]

Go to Control Panel > Security Center..

Now click on 'Change the way Security Center alerts me'

--
Mike Hall - MVP

Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

No fuss, no muss, no screeches about Linux or Apple, just the correct
answer.

Saucy

 

[The Daily Abnormal]

Stick to windows moron, and promise to never use Linux. That will be
fantastic because linux-like operating systems will dominate in the next
10 years, and will be everywhere. over 90% of technology will be based on
linux. Better yet, stick with vista... lol dont even upgrade to windows.
you crazy lunatic ****ed up imbacile.

HA HA HA HA - What a crock of shit. See, I told you, you were a ****ing
douche bag retard. The only thing linux will dominate in 10 years is the
trash can. 99% of technology will pass your sorry ass and you will be out
in the street.

You should get a book, "Vista for Retards" study real hard and maybe in 2
years, you just might be able to navigate past the desktop. What a sorry
sack of shit you are. Ubuntu is up your alley. Stick with OpenSores
software because that is all you can afford.

 

[Justin]

Five Misunderstood Features in Windows Vista
¡E User Account Control
¡E Image management
¡E Display Driver Model
¡E Search
¡E 64 bit architecture
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...86-9661-49b1-87ce-6d4a39e83747&DisplayLang=en

The User Access Control (UAC) can detect rootkits before they install.
AV-Test.org carried on a test of common AV applications to find out how
good they detected rootkits. The examiner had to turn off UAC because it
detected every rootkit used in the test.

Avoiding Rootkit Infection.
"The rules to avoid rootkit infection are for the most part the same as
avoiding any malware infection however there are some special
considerations:
Because rootkits meddle with the operating system itself they *require*
full Administrator rights to install. Hence infection can be avoided by
running Windows from an account with *lesser* privileges" (LUA in XP and
UAC in Vista).

You should understand the reason why UAC is there. You should read about
the two access tokens for user/admin on Vista, and yes, if UAC is disabled,
then Run As Administrator is disabled too.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc709691.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc160882.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc138019.aspx

Now, listen to the experts and be guided accordingly!

Good luck

I understand why UAC is there.
I also understand that it interferes with Firefox/Thunderbird's update
and the Java updater as well.

 

[Jack the Ripper]

I understand why UAC is there.
I also understand that it interferes with Firefox/Thunderbird's update
and the Java updater as well.

Interferes as far as what? I have Thunderbird and Java in use, and I
see no interference with UAC enabled, other than you have to approve the
update.

Do you really know what UAC is about? It's about not allowing a
user-admin to run on the Internet or do anything else as a full-rights
admin like on XP.

The admin-user is only a user with Standard user rights, that must be
escalated to admin rights, the escalation to full-admin rights only last
for the moment of escalation to do the task, and then the admin user is
returned to being a Standard user again with Standard user rights only,
not admin rights.

Unlike XP that has no UAC, Vista doesn't allow a virus or malware the
ability to have full rein on the computer once it has compromised the
machine like on XP with a full-rights admin user using the machine.

Malware or a virus can only run under the context of the user account
that is using the computer. If admin user on Vista is only a Standard
user with Standard user rights in reality that must be escalated to full
admin rights, then that mitigates the damage that can occur because the
virus or malware is not running with full admin rights with the user
that's using an admin account on Vista.

Nothing is bulletproof, but one doesn't see a lot of posts by Vista
users about virus or malware issues, not like you see on XP.

 

[Gordon]

I understand why UAC is there.
I also understand that it interferes with Firefox/Thunderbird's update and
the Java updater as well.

Nope - doesn't do that here....

 

[Justin]

Interferes as far as what? I have Thunderbird and Java in use, and I
see no interference with UAC enabled, other than you have to approve the
update.

As in when it tried to update, the UAC prompt comes up; I allow it and
it still doesn't update.

Do you really know what UAC is about? It's about not allowing a
user-admin to run on the Internet or do anything else as a full-rights
admin like on XP.

I know that.

The admin-user is only a user with Standard user rights, that must be
escalated to admin rights, the escalation to full-admin rights only last
for the moment of escalation to do the task, and then the admin user is
returned to being a Standard user again with Standard user rights only,
not admin rights.

I know that too.

Unlike XP that has no UAC, Vista doesn't allow a virus or malware the
ability to have full rein on the computer once it has compromised the
machine like on XP with a full-rights admin user using the machine.

Malware or a virus can only run under the context of the user account
that is using the computer. If admin user on Vista is only a Standard
user with Standard user rights in reality that must be escalated to full
admin rights, then that mitigates the damage that can occur because the
virus or malware is not running with full admin rights with the user
that's using an admin account on Vista.

I know that too.

 

[+Bob+]

Nothing is bulletproof, but one doesn't see a lot of posts by Vista
users about virus or malware issues, not like you see on XP.

No, but you do see a lot of posts about how UAC sucks. Good idea, bad
implementation.

 

[Ian D]

Disabling UAC is not dangerious at all tbh. It is rather annoying and
unless your a 'newb' i suggest disabling it.

If you know what your doing on your computer the only thing you really
need is a firewall and not an anti-virus.

I see something of a double standard here. Running Vista without
UAC enabled is a big, "no-no," yet running XP, which has no such
"protection" is perfectly acceptable, although Vista without UAC
is probably still more secure than XP.

 

[Jack the Ripper]

No, but you do see a lot of posts about how UAC sucks. Good idea, bad
implementation.

It's the posts of the ignorant. I would rather have it enabled so that I
am not on the Internet with full admin rights, like the previous
versions of the NT based O/S(s,) which are open by default O/S(s) and
wide-open to attack/compromise by default.

Is that so hard for you or anyone else to understand?

 

[Justin]

It's the posts of the ignorant. I would rather have it enabled so that I
am not on the Internet with full admin rights, like the previous
versions of the NT based O/S(s,) which are open by default O/S(s) and
wide-open to attack/compromise by default.

Is that so hard for you or anyone else to understand?

As long as you're not logged on as admin you should be fine. At most I
keep users at Power User rights.
While I understand running as admin is unsafe, simply having the account
enabled is not a security risk.

 

[I.C. Greenfields]

No, but you do see a lot of posts about how UAC sucks. Good idea, bad
implementation.

I also turned it off. It was the biggest PIA I every ran across using a
computer.

 

[Jack the Ripper]

As long as you're not logged on as admin you should be fine. At most I
keep users at Power User rights.
While I understand running as admin is unsafe, simply having the account
enabled is not a security risk.

I am going to try to explain this again. The out of the box admin
account on Vista that is given to a user or any subsequent admin account
that is created on Vista with UAC enabled is NOT a full-rights-admin
account. It's only a Standard user account, which must be escalated to a
use the full-adminrights token to do anything requiring
admin-full-rights as an administrator.

The escalation is only held for the moment of privileged escalation, and
the user is returned to being a Standard user using the Standard user
token.

It's being explained in the link, read it man read it and understand
what it is telling you.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc709691.aspx

If one knows what is happening and one knows the context in which
malware will infect the machine, which is based on the context of the
user account rights being used as a logged-in user, then one knows that
with UAC enabled there is very little chance of the machine being
infected if one can recognize the condition based on the UAC prompt.

I have been on a couple of sites where something tried to install itself
on the machine with me being admin user/really only a Standard user that
UAC prompted me for approval, which I was able to kill it based on me
knowing that it was dubious in nature.

You cannot say the same and there is nothing in place on the previous
versions of the NT based O/S to notify of the condition from an O/S
standpoint.

UAC does other things as well to protect the O/S such as using
virtulization on the registry and other protected areas like Program
Files and the Windows/System32 directories.

Now, some users can turn UAC off and play the cowboy role like they were
and are doing with XP, as they have that right to turn UAC off, but I am
not one of the them. And on top of that, turning UAC off even with them
being an admin-user, they are still not an admin with full-admin-rights.

There is only one admin account on Vista that has full-admin-rights and
that account must be activated. And even that account is prohibited from
doing certain things, unless one knows how to come around the restrictions.

<http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/wind...idden-administrator-account-on-windows-vista/>

UAC will remain on. And I don't care what anyone on the negative tip on
UAC has to say about it.

 

[Gordon]

I also turned it off. It was the biggest PIA I every ran across using a
computer.

Then you obviously mess with it rather than do WORK with it. I get the UAC
prompt probably twice a week if not less.