![]() |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| Is there a way to grant an applicatoin the right to execute now and forever more? An app that I use 3,4,10,15 times a day triggers an UAC prompt. I understand that the app should be written in a different manner so that it does not need Admin rights. Until it is re-written, I do not want to be prompted __EVERY__ time i launch it. Is this possible? Since I think I already know the answer (but I am wrong far more than I would like to admit which is why i am posting), Why not??? and to answer the first 3 arguments against: 1) I don't care that the app should be written differently. It is not written differently now, and I need to run it now. 2) It's not really a security hole to whitelist an app(s) - UAC is still running. Firewall is still running. User is still a least priveledge account, etc. 3) i haven't thought far enough to have 3 counter arguments. Can someone explain to MS the value in grannular configuration? 'Configure UAC' should have a few more options than Turn On / Off. Thanks for all of your help and feedback. Matt | Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
| | #2 (permalink) | |
| Unfortunately, there is no way to have a specific app silently elevate while leaving UAC enabled for all other administrative apps. I do feel your pain here -- I bounce off the elevation prompt many times a day. I just learned to quick hit ALT+C whenever it's coming up. There's plenty of websites that give instructions on how to turn UAC off, if it's really ruining your day. Although it doesn't seem like that's a security hole, it actually can be. Security is a 'weakest link' game. If a program has a "golden ticket" to run elevated, then the system's security is only as strong as that app is -- and most apps aren't written in such a way as to be strong against subversion by other apps. Suppose mmc.exe (the Microsoft Management Console - open the Start menu, right-click on 'Computer' and choose 'Manage') were automatically quietly elevated every time. Then a bad guy would just have to figure out how to run it from the command line; or to ask it to open a malformed .mmc file that causes it to crash exploitably. "anySmarterIdrunLinux" wrote: Quote:
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| |
|
| | #3 (permalink) | |
| > If a program has a "golden ticket" to run elevated, Quote:
bad guy program running? What prevents a "bad guy" program to patch a "normal" program, then asking for running the "normal" program in an elevated mode ? If an integrity check was done and failed, then prompting the user to require a specific action would be meaningfull. I don't see UAC doing a crc check or whatever mechanism to be assured that the "normal"program had not been patched by a bad guy. actually an user can accept to run in an elevated mode a program that is supposed to be a "safe" one ? A white list, associated to a crc check (or whatever mechanism to check integrity) is, in my mind the way to acchieve this goal without endless prompting the user for anything. Regards -- Olivier | Guest
Posts: n/a
| |
|
| | #4 (permalink) | ||
| Thanks for the reply. I understand your comment about the dangers of 'whitelisting' an application, but have to disagree in pricipal. A user that keeps a .txt file on the desktop called 'passwords.txt' might also try to whitelist system control programs, scripts, etc. You can't help them anyway. But a 3rd party app, that is not on every computer, cannot be manipulated if the system itself has not already been comprimised. "Jeff Smith [MSFT]" wrote: Quote:
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| ||
|
| | #5 (permalink) | ||
| Thanks for the reply. I understand your comment about the dangers of 'whitelisting' an application, but have to disagree in pricipal. A user that keeps a .txt file on the desktop called 'passwords.txt' might also try to whitelist system control programs, scripts, etc. You can't help them anyway. But a 3rd party app, that is not on every computer, cannot be manipulated if the system itself has not already been comprimised. "Jeff Smith [MSFT]" wrote: Quote:
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| ||
|
| | #6 (permalink) | ||
| Thanks for the reply Jeff. But i have to disagree in pricipal. _MAYBE_ you could make an argument for not allowing core MS utilities from being 'whitelisted', but if an admin is that lazy, then I say let them go. you can't stop them from saving 'passwords.txt' on their desktop either. But we're talking about 3rd party applications - not standard packages. In order for a non-standard application to be comprimised, the system would already have been comprimised. So all we're left with is a PITA. As mentioned by Olivier - combine a whitelist with a CRC check - MS are you listening? SP2 maybe??? thx again "Jeff Smith [MSFT]" wrote: Quote:
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| ||
|
| | #7 (permalink) | |||
| I guess Vista helps in more ways than i knew. Sorry for the duplicate posts... "anySmarterIdrunLinux" wrote: Quote:
| Guest
Posts: n/a
| |||
|