4 ms·

I'm not looking for a fight here, but I plead innocent to your accusations. I would not suggest I am any authority on the subject; quite the contrary. I have fo

by gt_ 9y ago

I'm not looking for a fight here, but I plead innocent to your accusations. I would not suggest I am any authority on the subject; quite the contrary. I have found it annoying, but I won't take responsibility for that. If I am ignorant, it's not due to a lack of interest or effort. I have tried researching it on the web and found: 1) No justification for keeping it enabled on my workstation. 2) A myriad of don't ask why beratements like yours which cause one to wonder if the author is more interested in belittling others or helping them. I never assumed the warnings were wrong, but they were not helpful. The impositions of UAC on my workstation were severe and I never found an explanation that addressed why I need it. If I obeyed the warnings of every computer safety expert, I would not even have a workstation to begin with. In life, one must choose their battles. I'm doing my best over here. At risk of being attacked and down-voted again ,I'll ask a few questions if you don't mind: In my experience using Linux, I could just type 'sudo' and be root. As far as I can tell, this does not protect as much as impose a level of mindfulness. What am I missing? If Windows UAC serves an equivalent purpose, why are the consequences so much more severe?

ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Linux was fundamentally well built for one. There's a lot of things that should be protected from even without UAC that aren't. With UAC disabled it is trivially easy for any number of system exploits that are easily preventable. I suspect many 'don't ask why' responses at this point come from the fact that we can probably no longer wrap our heads around all the possible ways you can be screwed with UAC disabled. (If anything, I am mostly still surprised Microsoft permits you to shut it off.) In Linux you don't just type sudo, you also enter your password. In a best case scenario, you should have a different account for administrative actions as your normal use, but for both Linux and Windows the elevation requirement ensures that a program meant to run on your computer can not silently and suddenly make changes to your computer. If your computer is not connected to the Internet, or you know the contents of every single block of code on every application your computer runs, this is not a problem, but for most people, this is the bedrock of basic security: That if something wants to make a system level change to your computer you must explicitly permit it to do so.
- gt_ 9y ago
  Thanks for the explanations. I don’t expect it is an easy explanation, but I will propose the lack of one is the reason so many thousands of Windows machines have UAC disabled. And, brunt abstract fear is not going to change that. In Windows, UAC has 2 effects. One, some softwares cannot be opened or installed. Two, installing software requires an extra permissions window be clicked on. No password is involved. I don’t mind the second at all. The first however is awful. Numerous softwares I depend on are sacrificed if I enable UAC. These are softwares from very reputable companies which I have used for many years and depended on for many projects. Linux is not an option (hopefully is obvious why) and Windows with UAC isn’t either. So, I’m using Windows with UAC disabled just like probably a million other people. This is a very pervasive issue. So, one whose career depends on disabled UAC is left to wonder “what is the risk?” And they are left with no useful answer to that question other than ‘too many to wrap heads around’ what can we expect them to do? It feels like a mortal threat at this point. The world is full of disease but you still go to the grocery store because you need food. Some things are out of my control and effectively using my computer for work with UAC is one of them. I think your spellbound reaction to people disabling UAC lacks some consideration for their situation. Is it a problem? I’m certain it is. But, different people have different goals and priorities in their life. If yours is to enable UAC on other’s computers, the path to accomplishing that will begin with understanding why it is disabled. It sounds like a noble and important cause that I would be happy to help with, because circumstantial claims assert UAC is helpful to protect (me? my computer?) and that sounds good.
  - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
    My question would be... what programs do you have that don't work with UAC? To give you some idea, I work in an environment with public safety software written in the Windows XP era. While occasionally a burden to troubleshoot, once you figure out which settings work... pretty much everything works fine with UAC. You just may need to use compatibility mode and/or grant permissions to certain folders on your system.

by gt_ 9y ago

ocdtrekkie 9y ago

Linux was fundamentally well built for one. There's a lot of things that should be protected from even without UAC that aren't. With UAC disabled it is trivially easy for any number of system exploits that are easily preventable. I suspect many 'don't ask why' responses at this point come from the fact that we can probably no longer wrap our heads around all the possible ways you can be screwed with UAC disabled. (If anything, I am mostly still surprised Microsoft permits you to shut it off.) In Linux you don't just type sudo, you also enter your password. In a best case scenario, you should have a different account for administrative actions as your normal use, but for both Linux and Windows the elevation requirement ensures that a program meant to run on your computer can not silently and suddenly make changes to your computer. If your computer is not connected to the Internet, or you know the contents of every single block of code on every application your computer runs, this is not a problem, but for most people, this is the bedrock of basic security: That if something wants to make a system level change to your computer you must explicitly permit it to do so.

gt_ 9y ago
Thanks for the explanations. I don’t expect it is an easy explanation, but I will propose the lack of one is the reason so many thousands of Windows machines have UAC disabled. And, brunt abstract fear is not going to change that. In Windows, UAC has 2 effects. One, some softwares cannot be opened or installed. Two, installing software requires an extra permissions window be clicked on. No password is involved. I don’t mind the second at all. The first however is awful. Numerous softwares I depend on are sacrificed if I enable UAC. These are softwares from very reputable companies which I have used for many years and depended on for many projects. Linux is not an option (hopefully is obvious why) and Windows with UAC isn’t either. So, I’m using Windows with UAC disabled just like probably a million other people. This is a very pervasive issue. So, one whose career depends on disabled UAC is left to wonder “what is the risk?” And they are left with no useful answer to that question other than ‘too many to wrap heads around’ what can we expect them to do? It feels like a mortal threat at this point. The world is full of disease but you still go to the grocery store because you need food. Some things are out of my control and effectively using my computer for work with UAC is one of them. I think your spellbound reaction to people disabling UAC lacks some consideration for their situation. Is it a problem? I’m certain it is. But, different people have different goals and priorities in their life. If yours is to enable UAC on other’s computers, the path to accomplishing that will begin with understanding why it is disabled. It sounds like a noble and important cause that I would be happy to help with, because circumstantial claims assert UAC is helpful to protect (me? my computer?) and that sounds good.
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  My question would be... what programs do you have that don't work with UAC? To give you some idea, I work in an environment with public safety software written in the Windows XP era. While occasionally a burden to troubleshoot, once you figure out which settings work... pretty much everything works fine with UAC. You just may need to use compatibility mode and/or grant permissions to certain folders on your system.