4 ms·

Incorrect. Firefox is always installed by admin user at the first install (UAC prompt there is inevitable). If you run an unzipped firefox from your desktop, i

by zobzu 15y ago

Incorrect. Firefox is always installed by admin user at the first install (UAC prompt there is inevitable). If you run an unzipped firefox from your desktop, it will not install the updater, because it CANNOT. There must be at least ONE UAC prompt ONCE. And that's where it's installed as admin, that's what UAC is there for. You don't seem to understand how permissions work.

huhtenberg 15y ago
You don't seem to understand what I said. Firefox (or any other program for that matter) should be able to install itself when run by an under-privileged user. SHOULD. If it CANT, then its installer is designed incorrectly and its installation mechanics are wrong. Consider a simple case when I am on a shared computer as a restricted user. In an Internet cafe or similar. I should be able to install, run and use Firefox. There's basically no technical reason why it will not be able to run under a restricted set of privileges. It has no drivers to install, it doesn't bind to privileges range of ports, it doesn't need to install a service. It should quietly go into C:\Users\dude\Program Files and make itself comfortable there. Microsoft has a set of guidelines, in part covering where what should go. Some of these guidelines are simply retarded, they have always been. Their existence is not an excuse for not questioning them. If a developer insists on following them, it just doesn't speak much of a developer.
- kijin 15y ago
  Well, there's Portable Firefox for that use case... There are some benefits to installing critical apps like web browsers outside of the user's home directory. If a virus compromises the user account, it still can't touch the web browser's executable.
- neilparikh 15y ago
  I've been able to install both Firefox Aurora and Nightly on my windows restricted account. Haven't tried the regular Firefox, but I'm assuming it's the same, because I installed Aurora and Nightly around version 9.
  - cpeterso 15y ago
    Did Aurora and Nightly install themselves into your %USERPROFILE% directory instead of %PROGRAMFILES%?
el_presidente 15y ago
I don't understand how Windows does permissions so I might be wrong, but how is this behavior different from a trojan?

by zobzu 15y ago

huhtenberg 15y ago

You don't seem to understand what I said. Firefox (or any other program for that matter) should be able to install itself when run by an under-privileged user. SHOULD. If it CANT, then its installer is designed incorrectly and its installation mechanics are wrong. Consider a simple case when I am on a shared computer as a restricted user. In an Internet cafe or similar. I should be able to install, run and use Firefox. There's basically no technical reason why it will not be able to run under a restricted set of privileges. It has no drivers to install, it doesn't bind to privileges range of ports, it doesn't need to install a service. It should quietly go into C:\Users\dude\Program Files and make itself comfortable there. Microsoft has a set of guidelines, in part covering where what should go. Some of these guidelines are simply retarded, they have always been. Their existence is not an excuse for not questioning them. If a developer insists on following them, it just doesn't speak much of a developer.

kijin 15y ago
Well, there's Portable Firefox for that use case... There are some benefits to installing critical apps like web browsers outside of the user's home directory. If a virus compromises the user account, it still can't touch the web browser's executable.
neilparikh 15y ago
I've been able to install both Firefox Aurora and Nightly on my windows restricted account. Haven't tried the regular Firefox, but I'm assuming it's the same, because I installed Aurora and Nightly around version 9.
- cpeterso 15y ago
  Did Aurora and Nightly install themselves into your %USERPROFILE% directory instead of %PROGRAMFILES%?

el_presidente 15y ago

I don't understand how Windows does permissions so I might be wrong, but how is this behavior different from a trojan?