Vista UAC?
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
In the Windows Security Center, on the left hand menu, at the bottom it will say "Change the way Security Center Alerts me"
http://www.tweak-uac.com/ I'd also recommend that instead of turning it off completely as well.
http://www.tweak-uac.com/ I'd also recommend that instead of turning it off completely as well.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Silent mode F T W.
Burnsy
Burnsy
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Use it for the virtualised registry then. There really is no excuse for turning it off 
Burnsy
Burnsy
Use it for the virtualised registry then. There really is no excuse for turning it off
Burnsy
Yeah there is, its garbage that a knowledgable user just doesn't need.
You can have IE7 protected mode ON with UAC OFF.
Exactly I never had security issues with xp and vista is more secure than that.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Which is less secure than IE7 w/ Protected Mode, by a long long way.
Linux users have something almost identical to UAC and they don't turn it off. The Linux userbase has one of the highest concentrations of computer experts of any operating system. I wonder why they don't turn theirs off?
You cannot have IE7 w/ Protected Mode if UAC is turned off.
Jesus, Microsoft really has made a complete ****-up of re-educating its users about Windows security for Vista
I'm going outside to take all the manhole covers off in the street, it won't matter, I won't fall down the holes.
They should have made UAC not able to be turned off, that way it would force both bad programmers and security-ignorant (or arrogant) users to do things properly. UAC would, of course, have not had been needed if people had any idea of correct security settings. (Hint, running as Admin routinely is not a correct security setting)
They should have made UAC not able to be turned off, that way it would force both bad programmers and security-ignorant (or arrogant) users to do things properly. UAC would, of course, have not had been needed if people had any idea of correct security settings. (Hint, running as Admin routinely is not a correct security setting)
Linux users have something almost identical to UAC and they don't turn it off. The Linux userbase has one of the highest concentrations of computer experts of any operating system. I wonder why they don't turn theirs off?
You cannot have IE7 w/ Protected Mode if UAC is turned off.
Jesus, Microsoft really has made a complete ****-up of re-educating its users about Windows security for Vista
There is a world of difference between sudo & UAC
UAC is a badly implemented pile of garbage with far too many prompts for its own good (At one stage there were about three for creating new folders in certain places IIRC), whereas sudo is designed for a single prompt for any given task. (IE. Creating a new folder in a protected area & working with the files there, sudo gives one prompt at the start whereas UAC prompts at each stage)
The biggest difference is that sudo is built around the assumption that you know what you are doing when you choose to press the button & therefore accept the consequences, whereas UAC assumes you are an idiot, who needs to confirm every little bit.
Furthermore, UAC pops up far too much for its own good- In the daily use of a computer (General browsing/ office work), you will see plenty of UAC prompts, but you shouldn't see any sudo prompts, all things being equal
Idea is good, implementation is garbage.
Cheers
-Leezer-
There is a world of difference between sudo & UAC
UAC is a badly implemented pile of garbage with far too many prompts for its own good (At one stage there were about three for creating new folders in certain places IIRC), whereas sudo is designed for a single prompt for any given task. (IE. Creating a new folder in a protected area & working with the files there, sudo gives one prompt at the start whereas UAC prompts at each stage)
Which has mostly been improved now.
The biggest difference is that sudo is built around the assumption that you know what you are doing when you choose to press the button & therefore accept the consequences, whereas UAC assumes you are an idiot, who needs to confirm every little bit.
Furthermore, UAC pops up far too much for its own good- In the daily use of a computer (General browsing/ office work), you will see plenty of UAC prompts, but you shouldn't see any sudo prompts, all things being equal
This is a result of poorly written software, not UAC. If windows developers stopped trying to randomly scribble all over program files or make system level alterations in standard use, it wouldn't occur. Sudo would also prompt exactly the same if programs were attempting to do the same things.
The implementation is fine, the user expectation and the quality of third party software triggering unnecessary prompts is the problem.
Last edited:
Which isn't why I use it.
I use it as it has the quick launch bar and has tons of add ons.
As you can tell I'm not to concerned about security the computer is more tha secure enough for the user. If by a remote chance something does happen. Which it hasn't since 2002 then it'll just get reinstalled.
Most of those are 100% the fault of the initial design for Windows (Moving right back to the DOS roots here), not the application developers.
Because of this initial design, programs have been built that way from the ground up. Granted, if 100% of the software base in use today was rebuilt to fully Vista compliant standards, UAC would work better, but still nowhere near perfect.
It's silly little things like standards here- From the start, Unix/ Linux provided a clearly defined set of locations for each component (Program executable, config file etc.) to be located, Windows has never done this. XP & Vista have attempted to do this, but nowhere near the level required, and so UAC has to preside over this hash of stuff.
Cheers
-Leezer-
let's face it, security is a non issue for most sensible users. how many times did your system get compromised running ie6?