Become REAL Administrator

Vista Ultimate x64

Alright, here's the rundown.

I want to become and absolute Administrator of Vista.

I do not want to have it complaining about proper permissions to alter a
file. I should not have to right click and "Run As Administrator". I should
not have to use a password and log into a special account.

All I ask is total access and control of my operating system.

So far: I have disabled UAC, I have an auto login to my Administrator
account, I have enabled administrator account status in the local security
policy setup.

Yet, after all this, I still am nagged that I do not have proper permissions
or administrator status to move, delete, or edit files!

Security is NOT a problem here, don't wory about it. All I ask if for
control of this $250 OS.

"D3DAiM" <> wrote in message
news:90EDA272-5941-49A4-A2DD-...
> Vista Ultimate x64
>
> Alright, here's the rundown.
>
> I want to become and absolute Administrator of Vista.
>
> I do not want to have it complaining about proper permissions to alter a
> file. I should not have to right click and "Run As Administrator". I
> should
> not have to use a password and log into a special account.
>
> All I ask is total access and control of my operating system.
>
> So far: I have disabled UAC, I have an auto login to my Administrator
> account, I have enabled administrator account status in the local security
> policy setup.
>
> Yet, after all this, I still am nagged that I do not have proper
> permissions
> or administrator status to move, delete, or edit files!
>
> Security is NOT a problem here, don't wory about it. All I ask if for
> control of this $250 OS.


Remove Vista and install Windows XP or an older version of Windows. You are
looking for an OS that doesn't enforce security. All the good ones (Vista,
OS/X, Linux, Unix, AIX, Solaris, etc.) do.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca

"Kerry Brown" wrote:

> "D3DAiM" <> wrote in message
> news:90EDA272-5941-49A4-A2DD-...
> > Vista Ultimate x64
> >
> > Alright, here's the rundown.
> >
> > I want to become and absolute Administrator of Vista.
> >
> > I do not want to have it complaining about proper permissions to alter a
> > file. I should not have to right click and "Run As Administrator". I
> > should
> > not have to use a password and log into a special account.
> >
> > All I ask is total access and control of my operating system.
> >
> > So far: I have disabled UAC, I have an auto login to my Administrator
> > account, I have enabled administrator account status in the local security
> > policy setup.
> >
> > Yet, after all this, I still am nagged that I do not have proper
> > permissions
> > or administrator status to move, delete, or edit files!
> >
> > Security is NOT a problem here, don't wory about it. All I ask if for
> > control of this $250 OS.
>
>
> Remove Vista and install Windows XP or an older version of Windows. You are
> looking for an OS that doesn't enforce security. All the good ones (Vista,
> OS/X, Linux, Unix, AIX, Solaris, etc.) do.
>
> --
> Kerry Brown
> Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
> http://www.vistahelp.ca
>
>
> Thanks for the sarcasm. However, I do have a dual-boot setup with linux and it does, indeed, have the security/control I need and executes it measurably better than Windows Vista.

Unfortunately, I do need Vista for some applications and uses. I would like
be administrator.

>>
>>
>> Thanks for the sarcasm. However, I do have a dual-boot setup with linux
>> and it does, indeed, have the security/control I need and executes it
>> measurably better than Windows Vista.
>
> Unfortunately, I do need Vista for some applications and uses. I would
> like
> be administrator.


Although sarcastic my post was serious. If you logon with an administrator
account you are an administrator. What problems are you experiencing?

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca

On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 03:26:02 -0700, D3DAiM

>Vista Ultimate x64

>I want to become and absolute Administrator of Vista.
>All I ask is total access and control of my operating system.

>Security is NOT a problem here, don't wory about it. All I ask if for
>control of this $250 OS.

You can't have what you want, because MS has dissolved the line
between what you (as human user) do during your login session, and
what is done during that session by programs and content that can be
automatically run in various ways, or that can fool you into taking
greater than apparent risks due to a combination of poor UI (e.g.
hiding .PIF extensions) and poor type discipline (e.g. running raw
..EXE code in a .PIF, groping malformed .ANI when "view as text" etc.)

So you have to retreat to the "panic room" while the bad guys are left
to stride around the rest of the house you thought you'd owned.

UAC is just the lock on your panic room door, without which you'd be
that much more at risk. Instead of getting angered by that lock, get
angry about why you have to cower there in the first place.



>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
The rights you save may be your own
>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

>>Vista Ultimate x64
>
>>I want to become and absolute Administrator of Vista.
>>All I ask is total access and control of my operating system.
>
>>Security is NOT a problem here, don't wory about it. All I ask if for
>>control of this $250 OS.


>You can't have what you want, because MS has dissolved the line
>between what you (as human user) do during your login session, and
>what is done during that session by programs and content that can be
>automatically run in various ways, or that can fool you into taking
>greater than apparent risks due to a combination of poor UI (e.g.
>hiding .PIF extensions) and poor type discipline (e.g. running raw
>.EXE code in a .PIF, groping malformed .ANI when "view as text" etc.)
>
>So you have to retreat to the "panic room" while the bad guys are left
>to stride around the rest of the house you thought you'd owned.
>
>UAC is just the lock on your panic room door, without which you'd be
>that much more at risk. Instead of getting angered by that lock, get
>angry about why you have to cower there in the first place.
>

I guess it has gotten to the point now where MS is telling a person
how they can and can not use their system and what they can do on them
now!! Why should that surprise anyone here?!?!?

If a persons box is connected to the net I MIGHT be able to see the
reasoning behind it what with viruses and all but what about people
who use they boxes without being connected?!?! Beleive it or not
there are a lot of them out there yet!!!

Maybe the next MS system should be named "Hal" and let IT just control
everything about your life!!!

Vith Vista, why do I need Yahoo scanning all my email downloads, Norton,
McAfee, firewalls or any of the other protection software?
Personally, I will stick with ME and XP. I have never had a virus or trojan
AND I am careful where I go on the internet.

Alright, a most recent experience.

There is a MSN folder in my C:\Program Files (x86) that I cannot delete
because I do not have the permission to delete as administrator. Although I
am logged in, I can do nothing in the permission system to grant me this one
ability that I am missing. Every time I attempt to grant myself the
permission over this single folder (there are others as well), I receive an
"Access Denied".

"Kerry Brown" wrote:

> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks for the sarcasm. However, I do have a dual-boot setup with linux
> >> and it does, indeed, have the security/control I need and executes it
> >> measurably better than Windows Vista.
> >
> > Unfortunately, I do need Vista for some applications and uses. I would
> > like
> > be administrator.
>
>
> Although sarcastic my post was serious. If you logon with an administrator
> account you are an administrator. What problems are you experiencing?
>
> --
> Kerry Brown
> Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
> http://www.vistahelp.ca
>
>
>

On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 08:52:49 -0400, kraut

>>>Vista Ultimate x64

>>>I want to become and absolute Administrator of Vista.
>>>All I ask is total access and control of my operating system.
>>>Security is NOT a problem here, don't wory about it. All I ask if for
>>>control of this $250 OS.

>>You can't have what you want, because MS has dissolved the line
>>between what you (as human user) do during your login session, and
>>what is done during that session by programs and content that can be
>>automatically run in various ways, or that can fool you into taking
>>greater than apparent risks ...
>>So you have to retreat to the "panic room" while the bad guys are left
>>to stride around the rest of the house you thought you'd owned.

>>UAC is the lock on your panic room door, ... Instead of getting
>> angered by that, get angry about why you have to cower there

>I guess it has gotten to the point now where MS is telling a person
>how they can and can not use their system and what they can do on them
>now!! Why should that surprise anyone here?!?!?

That's a separate topic, with regards to DRM and other automated
license enforcement strategies.

The point that it has gotten to, is:
- most PCs are on the 'net
- many of these PCs are infected
- many of these PCs have broadband power

The sum total of infected PCs (i.e. botnets) can rival or swamp the
strongest servers in terms of power and bandwidth. Most email is
spam, and 95% of spam is sent through botnets, so in a real sense,
these botnets are a (if not the) dominant infrastructure on the 'net.

>If a persons box is connected to the net I MIGHT be able to see the
>reasoning behind it what with viruses and all but what about people
>who use they boxes without being connected?!?! Beleive it or not
>there are a lot of them out there yet!!!

Only if a system is isolated entirely from the rest of the infosphere,
could one expect it to be unexposed to attack. A PC that is not on
the 'net is also not kept patched, and if it's still presented with
USB sticks and CDRs from "outside", it's still at risk - and that
small risk exposure is enlarged++ because of outdated code and av.

>Maybe the next MS system should be named "Hal" and let IT just control
>everything about your life!!!

The system already controls itself - Windows hardly ever stops
fiddling with things automatically, and that tendency has increased
steadily since the Win9x days.

The difference with UAC is that it asks you first ;-)

See: http://cquirke.mvps.org/exblog/onehand.htm

This was written before UAC was called that, and it attempts to do
what you describe in a more general way - the idea is that uber-hairy
"admin" things should be done in an environment that is automatically
isolated from other systems, hardened internally, and utterly truthful
in UI. An uncomy place for casual use (by design) and unfriendly to
those who need everything dummied down (by design).

IOW: Data access, Internet access, ful system rights. Pick one.



>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
Don't pay malware vendors - boycott Sony
>---------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Program Files is a system area. Changes here affect all users of the computer. Because of this there is a change in the way the NTFS permissions are assigned in Vista compared to XP. You must take ownership of the folder. Once you are the owner you will be able to change the permissions as you like. Here is how to take ownership. This is copied from Help and Support.

To take ownership of a folder
1. Right-click the folder that you want to take ownership of, and then click Properties.

2. Click the Security tab, click Advanced, and then click the Owner tab.

3. Click Edit. If you are prompted for an administrator password or confirmation, type the password or provide confirmation.

4. Click the name of the person you want to give ownership to.

5. If you want that person to be the owner of files and subfolders in this folder, select the Replace owner on subcontainers and objects check box.

6. Click OK.




Before you complain that you are the only user on your computer you have to understand how Windows works. There are many user accounts on your computer that hackers can take advantage of besides yours. Just a few are Administrator, Guest, Local System, Trusted Installer, Network Service, and more. All of these accounts are protected in various ways and files and folders are also protected from these accounts. It is the way security works. Without this type of security your computer is open to malware no matter what programs you install. The current animated cursors exploit is a good example of the dangers of weak security. In Vista (with UAC on) the damage this exploit can do is minimal even if you have no security programs installed. It is easily repaired and you never lose control of your pc. In XP even with a firewall, AV, anti-spyware, whatever installed if you surf to an infected site the system will be infected and owned by someone else.

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca


"D3DAiM" <> wrote in message news:BB87D021-62E1-46F0-985A-...
> Alright, a most recent experience.
>
> There is a MSN folder in my C:\Program Files (x86) that I cannot delete
> because I do not have the permission to delete as administrator. Although I
> am logged in, I can do nothing in the permission system to grant me this one
> ability that I am missing. Every time I attempt to grant myself the
> permission over this single folder (there are others as well), I receive an
> "Access Denied".
>
> "Kerry Brown" wrote:
>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for the sarcasm. However, I do have a dual-boot setup with linux
>> >> and it does, indeed, have the security/control I need and executes it
>> >> measurably better than Windows Vista.
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, I do need Vista for some applications and uses. I would
>> > like
>> > be administrator.
>>
>>
>> Although sarcastic my post was serious. If you logon with an administrator
>> account you are an administrator. What problems are you experiencing?
>>
>> --
>> Kerry Brown
>> Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
>> http://www.vistahelp.ca
>>
>>
>>