[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion

OT - UAC

Mayayana

4/25/2012 1:59:00 PM

This is slightly O.T., but interesting for anyone
dealing with permissions in Vista/7.

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/04/firefox-12-released-with-uac-less-update-system-on-w...

It talks about strategies to auto-update browsers
without a UAC prompt. I had been curious how that
worked. It turns out that Chrome is installing to the
personal folder, while the next Firefox is going to
have a new service with sufficient rights to run an
update.

So... we're looking at a situation where, increasingly,
one does not have the ability to alter installed software,
but the software programs themselves are essentially
trojan horse installations.


4 Answers

Dee Earley

4/25/2012 3:15:00 PM

0

On 25/04/2012 14:59, Mayayana wrote:
> This is slightly O.T., but interesting for anyone
> dealing with permissions in Vista/7.
>
> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/04/firefox-12-released-with-uac-less-update-system-on-w...
>
> It talks about strategies to auto-update browsers
> without a UAC prompt. I had been curious how that
> worked. It turns out that Chrome is installing to the
> personal folder, while the next Firefox is going to
> have a new service with sufficient rights to run an
> update.
>
> So... we're looking at a situation where, increasingly,
> one does not have the ability to alter installed software,
> but the software programs themselves are essentially
> trojan horse installations.

Not that I really agree with them, but...
You trusted the application enough to give it full access at one point.
Surely you still trust it? :p

--
Deanna Earley (dee.earley@icode.co.uk)
i-Catcher Development Team
http://www.icode.co.uk...

iCode Systems

(Replies direct to my email address will be ignored.
Please reply to the group.)

Mayayana

4/25/2012 6:11:00 PM

0

| Not that I really agree with them, but...
| You trusted the application enough to give it full access at one point.
| Surely you still trust it? :p
|

I never "trusted" any software to take action
that I don't instigate! I use software. It's a tool.
*I* have full access with that software. That's
very different from trusting Google, Mozilla, or
anyone else to run the software remotely on my
PC just because they wrote it.

You're the one
who feels most strongly that software must not
break the UAC rules. Now two browsers have
each broken it with different methods. The
Google approach of installing to the user folder
is really no different from setting no restrictions
on their program folder. It's just slightly more
"diplomatic".

But regardless of how one feels about auto-
updating, it's an interesting development for people
who need to install software. To some extent big
companies like that define the norm.

GS

4/25/2012 11:37:00 PM

0

Mayayana was thinking very hard :
> This is slightly O.T., but interesting for anyone
> dealing with permissions in Vista/7.
>
> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/04/firefox-12-released-with-uac-less-update-system-on-w...
>
> It talks about strategies to auto-update browsers
> without a UAC prompt. I had been curious how that
> worked. It turns out that Chrome is installing to the
> personal folder, while the next Firefox is going to
> have a new service with sufficient rights to run an
> update.
>
> So... we're looking at a situation where, increasingly,
> one does not have the ability to alter installed software,
> but the software programs themselves are essentially
> trojan horse installations.

Most interesting!
My Anti-virus software stops 'trojan' apps dead in their tracks
regardless of UAC restrictions and so I doubt I'd even install such
programs.<g>

--
Garry

Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-sep...
ClassicVB Users Regroup!
comp.lang.basic.visual.misc
microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion

Dee Earley

4/26/2012 8:21:00 AM

0

On 25/04/2012 19:10, Mayayana wrote:
> | Not that I really agree with them, but...
> | You trusted the application enough to give it full access at one point.
> | Surely you still trust it? :p
>
> You're the one who feels most strongly that software must not break
> the UAC rules.

That's why I said I don't agree with them.

--
Deanna Earley (dee.earley@icode.co.uk)
i-Catcher Development Team
http://www.icode.co.uk...

iCode Systems

(Replies direct to my email address will be ignored.
Please reply to the group.)