Here is a conumdrum for ya...

[Charlie Tame]

In message <[email protected]> The poster formerly known as 'The


Unfortunately, the user *IS* the problem. Out of the box, XP SP2 is
more or less fully secure to sit on the internet, and once you turn on
automatic updates and run as a limited user, you're more or less secure
as well.

The problem is that users don't do that, they run attachments from
unknown/untrusted sources, install ActiveX controls at a whim, run as
full administrator, and then act surprised when their PC gets
compromised.

Actually even running as Admin full time is nowhere near as dangerous as
claimed IF the user is responsible, however on systems where something
has to run unattended and reliably the advice to fully automate updates
is much more dangerous, since any task not running as a service is often
hosed. UAC has just made it even more likely that folks will try to find
a way around it...

 

[DevilsPGD]

In message <#[email protected]> Charlie Tame

Actually even running as Admin full time is nowhere near as dangerous as
claimed IF the user is responsible, however on systems where something
has to run unattended and reliably the advice to fully automate updates
is much more dangerous, since any task not running as a service is often
hosed. UAC has just made it even more likely that folks will try to find
a way around it...

Like I said, the user is the problem. If the user is responsible, they
won't have many issues (although application level exploits are always
going to be a problem, but it hasn't been a huge issue recently, it's
simply easier to trick morons into installing a trojan then to actually
find exploits -- Most exploits that are actually used weren't discovered
by blackhats until after the patches came out, hence "exploit
Wednesday")

For users that aren't responsible (most of the individual PC owners on
the planet), UAC is a stop-gap attempt to get their attention before
doing something stupid.

In my opinion, it's not even that, it's just a step towards annoying
users into getting software vendors to fix their crap so that a future
version of Windows can have users run as a true limited user without
creating huge software incompatibilities. The virtualization feature is
another clear example of Microsoft moving in this direction.

 

[The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly]

In message <[email protected]> The poster formerly known as 'The


Unfortunately, the user *IS* the problem. Out of the box, XP SP2 is
more or less fully secure to sit on the internet, and once you turn on
automatic updates and run as a limited user, you're more or less secure
as well.

The problem is that users don't do that, they run attachments from
unknown/untrusted sources, install ActiveX controls at a whim, run as
full administrator, and then act surprised when their PC gets
compromised.

MS could still use a better method than only to try to heap it all on
the user.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett