Why Permission?????

[Guest]

Hi,
Is there any to prevent the "Needs your permission...." question? I have
been using PC for well over 30 years and I am the only one using my computer.
I don't want to be asked for permission all the time. Also I just learned
that I can't use my Access Developer and send the output to a folder in the
"Program Files" folder. Is there a way around that?
So far I'm not too happy with Vista.......
Thanks,

 

[John Inzer]

Hi,
Is there any to prevent the "Needs your permission...." question? I
have been using PC for well over 30 years and I am the only one using
my computer. I don't want to be asked for permission all the time.
Also I just learned that I can't use my Access Developer and send the
output to a folder in the "Program Files" folder. Is there a way
around that?
So far I'm not too happy with Vista.......
Thanks,

====================================
FWIW...turning off User Account Control reduces
the security of your system.

The option to disable User Account Control
can be found at: Control Panel / Classic View /
User Accounts.

Maybe the following links will offer some ideas:

Disable UAC
http://www.blackviper.com/WinVista/supertweaks.htm#one

Download TweakUAC
http://www.tweak-uac.com/download/

Enable or Disable UAC From the Windows Vista Command Line
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/wind...able-uac-from-the-windows-vista-command-line/

How To Disable User Account Control
http://www.petri.co.il/disable_uac_in_windows_vista.htm

Windows Vista Secret #4: Disabling UAC
http://blogs.msdn.com/tims/archive/2006/09/20/windows-vista-secret-4-disabling-uac.aspx

--

John Inzer
MS Picture It! -
Digital Image MVP

Digital Image
Highlights and FAQs
http://tinyurl.com/aczzp

Notice
This is not tech support
I am a volunteer

Solutions that work for
me may not work for you

Proceed at your own risk

 

[babaloo]

The UAC as well as the way Vista equilibrates between administrator and user
is just a confused hash of nothingness pretending to be security.
Fundamentally the UAC warning box is a legal and PR tool: if the user okays
something that comes up with a UAC warning box and the user should not have
done so Microsoft places the blame on the user.
In reality if Vista were any more secure than XP, and it is not, Vista would
identify threats and explain what they are to the user instead of presenting
both routine and possibly dangerous disc operations in an identical fashion.
How is the user supposed to be able to figure out what Microsoft programmers
cannot figure out, namely how to identify malware.
The UAC system is crafted from the same stinking rubbish as the EULA.

 

[Crazy Noddy]

The UAC as well as the way Vista equilibrates between administrator and
user is just a confused hash of nothingness pretending to be security.
Fundamentally the UAC warning box is a legal and PR tool: if the user
okays something that comes up with a UAC warning box and the user should
not have done so Microsoft places the blame on the user.
In reality if Vista were any more secure than XP, and it is not, Vista
would identify threats and explain what they are to the user instead of
presenting both routine and possibly dangerous disc operations in an
identical fashion. How is the user supposed to be able to figure out what
Microsoft programmers cannot figure out, namely how to identify malware.
The UAC system is crafted from the same stinking rubbish as the EULA.

That's a real good conspiracy theory you've got going there. When's the book
version come out? <blink>

 

[Guest]

Don't use it. Stay with what ever you like better!

 

[NotMe]

You can turn off UAC (User Access Control) but it breaks other things.
My auto AV update wouldn't work with UAC off.
MS hired all the AOL programmers that got laid off because of AOL's 'great
success' with software, designed for beginners, that will protect you from
yourself. So it shouldn't come as a great surprise that Vista wants to hold
your hand and protect you from yourself...are you sure, really, REALLY sure?
Unless there is something you use that will ONLY run on Vista, I'd continue
to use XP as long as possible.
I think MS missed their foot and shot themselves in the head with this Vista
mess.

 

[Guest]

I turned off UAC the moment I installed Vista. I would rather have a hacker
rummage thru my PC depositing malware and virus's throughout rather than put
up with the frustrations of UAC and permissions (which can still be
problematic).

amenx

 

[Rick Rogers]

Hi Phil,

Properly coded applications do not require any permission, except perhaps
during installation. In Vista, programs run in a virtual environment (this
is the purpose of the AppData directory in the user folders), they do not
have permissions to write to or alter files in the Program Files directory.
Applications that require the ability to write there, or to a system
directory, will require elevated privileges thus creating the prompt (not
unlike prompting for root privileges in Linux). This came about due to the
large amount of malware infecting users running as admin by default and
allowing malware to install itself without the user's knowledge. Disabling
UAC will reduce the prompts (run msconfig, tools tab), but it will also
expose the system to the same malware problems afflicting earlier versions
of Windows.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com

 

[Clenna Lumina]

That's a real good conspiracy theory you've got going there. When's the
book version come out? <blink>

It's not a theory when it's true.

 

[Jerry White]

The UAC as well as the way Vista equilibrates between administrator and
user is just a confused hash of nothingness pretending to be security.
Fundamentally the UAC warning box is a legal and PR tool: if the user
okays something that comes up with a UAC warning box and the user should
not have done so Microsoft places the blame on the user.
In reality if Vista were any more secure than XP, and it is not, Vista
would identify threats and explain what they are to the user instead of
presenting both routine and possibly dangerous disc operations in an
identical fashion. How is the user supposed to be able to figure out what
Microsoft programmers cannot figure out, namely how to identify malware.
The UAC system is crafted from the same stinking rubbish as the EULA.

I find it completely absurd that an OS that's been touted in al lthe hype
coming to it's relase that it was supposed to be advanced compared to
anything we've seen in the past, yet we get UAC. I full agree it should give
you information and be able ot identify a potential threat. Viast is NOT
nothing at all what it was hyped to be. It's XP/2000 with a face list and a
full on service pack.

 

[Frank]

I find it completely absurd that an OS that's been touted in al lthe hype
coming to it's relase that it was supposed to be advanced compared to
anything we've seen in the past, yet we get UAC. I full agree it should give
you information and be able ot identify a potential threat. Viast is NOT
nothing at all what it was hyped to be. It's XP/2000 with a face list and a
full on service pack.

Oh really? You have no idea what you're talking about.
Try a more "in-depth" look.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/features/default.mspx

Frank

 

[Stephan Rose]

Hi,
Is there any to prevent the "Needs your permission...." question? I have
been using PC for well over 30 years and I am the only one using my computer.
I don't want to be asked for permission all the time. Also I just learned
that I can't use my Access Developer and send the output to a folder in the
"Program Files" folder. Is there a way around that?
So far I'm not too happy with Vista.......
Thanks,

Well if it makes you feel better, I had Vista ask me for permission 4 or 5
times once during the install process of *one* application: Microsoft
Visual Studio.

I really wonder what would have happened had I accidentally or purposely
denied in the middle of all those prompts...they did occur and random
times of the install process after all. Would have been interesting to see
how screwed up the system could have become. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[DanS]

Hi Phil,

Properly coded applications do not require any permission, except
perhaps during installation. In Vista, programs run in a virtual
environment (this is the purpose of the AppData directory in the user
folders), they do not have permissions to write to or alter files in
the Program Files directory. Applications that require the ability to
write there, or to a system directory, will require elevated
privileges thus creating the prompt (not unlike prompting for root
privileges in Linux). This came about due to the.....

fact that MS decided it wanted to allow IE to run scripts and activeX
controls that are able to write files anywhere on the hard drive and edit
the registry however it likes as well.

 

[Telstar]

The UAC as well as the way Vista equilibrates between administrator and
user is just a confused hash of nothingness pretending to be security.

This is completely true! Brute force amazingly obtuse and stupid approach.

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

It's not a theory when it's true.

Read here, especially the third paragraph:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

 

[Clenna Lumina]

Read here, especially the third paragraph:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

And what does that change? It's not a theory if it's true (that is, if it's
reality.)

 

[Steve Kostecke]

Oh really? You have no idea what you're talking about.
Try a more "in-depth" look.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/features/default.mspx

I have to wonder if you've even used Vista. I think Jerry was bang on from
my expiences with it.

(Actually looking at your posting history it's pointless talking to you.)

 

[Jan Hyde (VB MVP)]

"Jerry White" <[email protected]>'s wild thoughts were
released on Fri, 17 Aug 2007 22:12:36 -0700 bearing the
following fruit:

I find it completely absurd that an OS that's been touted in al lthe hype
coming to it's relase that it was supposed to be advanced compared to
anything we've seen in the past, yet we get UAC. I full agree it should give
you information and be able ot identify a potential threat. Viast is NOT
nothing at all what it was hyped to be. It's XP/2000 with a face list and a
full on service pack.

If you guys want to provide them with a list of all software
both current and future then I'm sure they'll get right on
it.

Seriously what you guys are suggesting is just not possible.

UAC is useful as it does help identify unwanted access to
parts of your computer. Most is indeed harmless and it's a
choice for the user, a choice I'm glad of since I don't want
certain things updating when it feels like it.

 

[Jan Hyde (VB MVP)]

Stephan Rose <[email protected]>'s wild thoughts were
released on Sat, 18 Aug 2007 06:52:58 -0500 bearing the
following fruit:

Well if it makes you feel better, I had Vista ask me for permission 4 or 5
times once during the install process of *one* application: Microsoft
Visual Studio.

I really wonder what would have happened had I accidentally or purposely
denied in the middle of all those prompts...they did occur and random
times of the install process after all. Would have been interesting to see
how screwed up the system could have become. =)

VS has lots of components, to think of it as one application
is really an oversimplification. My own software
installation lauches other setup programs behind the scenes
such as MDAC.

 

[Ken Blake]

And what does that change? It's not a theory if it's true (that is, if
it's reality.)

According to *your* definition of the word "theory." As the article I cited
states, that's only one definition of the word.