Hi,
The solution is for software to run where it should, in the virtual folder
created for it in the user profile. Software will catch up eventually to the
new requirements.
If there were some method of creating exceptions, you can rest assured that
malware writers would keep at it until they found a workaround. I would have
to side with Microsoft on this one on locking it down without exception,
there is just too many risks in allowing any sort of avenue for exception.
In truth, this is not a new concept, as any long time linux user can tell
you. Certain actions simply will require root privilege, and that it
shouldn't be invoked without the user's consent.
--
Best of Luck,
Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help -
www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts
http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com
"Adam Leinss" <> wrote in message
news:Xns99CA64B2DC6F8aleinsstoughguy@140.99.99.138 ...
> "Rick Rogers" <> wrote in
> news::
>
>> Hi Wes,
>>
>> No, there is no exception list (if there was, it would immediately
>> be targeted by malware). If they are prompting suddenly, and
>> didn't previously, then something has changed about the system or
>> the program. Have you done any updating (either the program or
>> windows) or changed permissions? A UAC prompt indicates the
>> program is trying to write to or change a file in a protected
>> system folder instead of the programs' virtual appfolder.
>
> Is there a reason Microsoft cannot do UAC exceptions based on hash
> rules?
>
> If the executable changes (updated, infection, etc), the user gets a
> prompt to reauthorize the program. This should present a red flag to
> the end user.
>
> The system is some what broken the way it is. This encourages people
> to turn UAC off which is not the desired method that Microsoft would
> suggest.
>
> Adam
> --
> Visit my PC Tech blog at www.leinss.com/blog