I turned off UAC

[kkevpan815]

I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations - very
little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.- Hide quotedtext -

- Show quoted text -

Err - One Work Station Takes Err Lots Of Admin. Err. <sigh>

Err.

 

[John Galt]

I'm sorry, HOW much "admin" does one workstation take? In my humble
experience as a Systems Accountant in fairly large organisations - very
little! Once the machine is set up, there's not a lot to do.

You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
want to have it THEIR way.

I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
I was finished with the initial setup.

That was 18 months ago.

 

[Gordon]

You may have a hard time understanding this, Gordon: some folks just
want to have it THEIR way.

I am one of them, and MY way was to shut it off when I first started
setting up this machine with Vista and MY way was to LEAVE it off when
I was finished with the initial setup.

That was 18 months ago.

OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the time" -
it just DOESN'T!

 

[John Galt]

OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the time" -
it just DOESN'T!

Once is too many time for me.

 

[Gordon]

Once is too many time for me.

I find this a very odd attitude.
Windows, which is insecure by design, now has some sort of security check so
that malignant software does not install by default.
Linux and Unix, which are both far more secure than Windows by design, have
to have credentials input when a system change is made and you can't turn
that off.
Windows users, who are battered by a huge assault of viruses, malware and
trojans, whinge like mad when an attempt is made to make the OS a little bit
more secure.
Linux (and Unix) users who have the far more secure systems, just accept it.

Do you not consider computer security AT ALL?

 

[KristleBawl]

OK but then let's put to rest the myth about UAC popping up "all the
time" - it just DOESN'T!

That's true! I only experience the UAC when I install something,
including some, but not all, program plug-ins or add-ons, and some, but
not all, manual updates for other software.

However, in a large office network environment, their are often a few
users that keep playing with the settings, changing the wallpaper, using
the recycle bin as a folder, etc. These people are innocently clicking
yes to *install* a wallpaper image because they won't listen to anyone.

They frequently add third-party toolbars for the fun of it, stick big
magnetic adverts on the sides of their computers, and forward every
email to everyone in their address book, but only after they click the
link and watch some specialty videos that only run after you *install*
the update for the player, conveniently located on the site, of course.

When I was in charge of a small network of only 8 computers, a server
and three printers, I spent more time fixing user meddling than actually
updating or patching anything.

Computers don't need admins, but users sure do!

 

[Gordon]

That's true! I only experience the UAC when I install something,
including some, but not all, program plug-ins or add-ons, and some, but
not all, manual updates for other software.

However, in a large office network environment, their are often a few
users that keep playing with the settings, changing the wallpaper, using
the recycle bin as a folder, etc. These people are innocently clicking
yes to *install* a wallpaper image because they won't listen to anyone.

They frequently add third-party toolbars for the fun of it, stick big
magnetic adverts on the sides of their computers, and forward every email
to everyone in their address book, but only after they click the link and
watch some specialty videos that only run after you *install* the update
for the player, conveniently located on the site, of course.

When I was in charge of a small network of only 8 computers, a server and
three printers, I spent more time fixing user meddling than actually
updating or patching anything.

Computers don't need admins, but users sure do!

Then the machines need to be locked down so the users CAN'T "fiddle" with
them....

 

[KristleBawl]

Then the machines need to be locked down so the users CAN'T "fiddle"
with them....

That was over a decade ago, when Win 3.11 was still in use and until
Win98SE was new. ;-)

General computer security has improved since then, and I left them with
a then-current general computing manual, customized to the proprietary
business software they used. It reduced a lot of the idiocy and was
well worth my time to create!

 

[John Galt]

I find this a very odd attitude.

Perhaps you're a very odd person. Evidence seems to weigh in that
direction.

Windows, which is insecure by design, now has some sort of security check so
that malignant software does not install by default.
Linux and Unix, which are both far more secure than Windows by design, have
to have credentials input when a system change is made and you can't turn
that off.
Windows users, who are battered by a huge assault of viruses, malware and
trojans, whinge like mad when an attempt is made to make the OS a little bit
more secure.
Linux (and Unix) users who have the far more secure systems, just accept it.

Do you not consider computer security AT ALL?

I've been online for nearly 20 years. For close to half of those 20
years (on and off, not contiguous periods) I surfed without benefit of
anti-virus software or malware protection.

For the past 3 years I've been retired and have spent in excess of 6-8
hours a day surfing the 'net, and doing email. At the present I have
only anti-virus protection (Avira, registered version). I have no
real-time malware protection. None of my antivirus programs have ever
detected a virus, and I have never been hit by any malware.

PLUS, I backup my entire system on a daily basis to another internal
disk and periodically copy the two most recent full backups (not the
incremental backups) to an external disk.

All the security I require is my own behavior and good common sense.

 

[Gordon]

I've been online for nearly 20 years. For close to half of those 20
years (on and off, not contiguous periods) I surfed without benefit of
anti-virus software or malware protection.

Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the effects
of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?

Sheeeesh!

For the past 3 years I've been retired and have spent in excess of 6-8
hours a day surfing the 'net, and doing email. At the present I have
only anti-virus protection (Avira, registered version). I have no
real-time malware protection. None of my antivirus programs have ever
detected a virus, and I have never been hit by any malware.

So YOU say. How do you know your computer is not a bot?

PLUS, I backup my entire system on a daily basis to another internal
disk and periodically copy the two most recent full backups (not the
incremental backups) to an external disk.

All the security I require is my own behavior and good common sense.

Err NO it's NOT
That is one of the selfish attitudes that ensures that the internet is awash
with windows viruses.

JEEEZE!

 

[John Galt]

Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the effects
of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?

Sheeeesh!

Careful, old bean... you're about to pop a vein.

So YOU say. How do you know your computer is not a bot?

Avira has bot protection, you fool.

Err NO it's NOT

Stick your "Err" up yer Limey arse.

 

[+Bob+]

Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the effects
of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on to?

Sheeeesh!

Really? I think you need to get a grip on reality.

How do you account for the hundreds of millions of users with
non-Vista OS's and nary a clue about viruses or security who are not
infested with a 'bot?

After thinking about that, perhaps you can figure out how someone
who's careful about their machine could actually have a virus free
computer without UAC.

 

[Gordon]

Really? I think you need to get a grip on reality.

How do you account for the hundreds of millions of users with
non-Vista OS's and nary a clue about viruses or security who are not
infested with a 'bot?

err because bots aren't WRITTEN for non-Windows OSs......DUH!!!!!!!!!

 

[+Bob+]

err because bots aren't WRITTEN for non-Windows OSs......DUH!!!!!!!!!

I didn't write "non-windows", I wrote "non-Vista".

Your point is valid that the MS-Windows architecture is a piece of
swiss cheese when it comes to security. Instead of fixing those
architectural problems, MS has chosen to apply band aids like UAC.
But, that's a different discussion.

 

[Gordon's Psychotherapist]

err because bots aren't WRITTEN for non-Windows OSs......DUH!!!!!!!!!

Err, you just don't know how bots are written, Err. DUH, maybe Err bots are
written for OS Windows and Err non OS Windows. Err.
Err.

 

[Gordon's Psychotherapist]

I find this a very odd attitude.
Windows, which is insecure by design, now has some sort of security check
so that malignant software does not install by default.
Linux and Unix, which are both far more secure than Windows by design,
have to have credentials input when a system change is made and you can't
turn that off.
Windows users, who are battered by a huge assault of viruses, malware and
trojans, whinge like mad when an attempt is made to make the OS a little
bit more secure.
Linux (and Unix) users who have the far more secure systems, just accept
it.

Do you not consider computer security AT ALL?

Err you should always Err consider computer security. Err. There maybe an
instance when Err comes through your system. Err.

 

[Gordon's Psychotherapist]

Then I have to say that YOU are one of the reasons that the internet is
awash with windows-attacking viruses. Yes YOU may not have seen the
effects of viruses, bit what about all the computers YOU passed viruses on
to?

Sheeeesh!



So YOU say. How do you know your computer is not a bot?

Err - He knows his computer is not a BOT. Err. <sigh>?

Err.

Err NO it's NOT

Err - It just might be, Err but it may not be. Err.

Err.

JEEEZE!

No no no Gordon. It's not JEEZE, it's Err. Err.

 

[Gordon's Psychotherapist]

Then the machines need to be locked down so the users CAN'T "fiddle" with
them....

Err you shouldn't be fiddling with your computer. Err. That is not
socially correct Err. Err.

 

[Pasan Indeewara]

UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.

err because bots aren't WRITTEN for non-Windows OSs......DUH!!!!!!!!!

 

[Gordon]

UAC is a stupid thing introduced in Vista.

Considering all the SECURE Operating systems (UNIX, AIX, Linux and MAC) use
it, or something very similar, why would you consider it stupid, unless you
are?