Various ways to escalate to admin

I am confused as to when to use which method of privilege escalation and
when. For example, there are at least 4 different ways to perform
escalation and they seem to produce different results. I have an admin
account defined and a regular user account that I do 99% of my work in. I
am using Vista Home Premium, by the way. I have used the following methods
at one time or another:

1) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
request to provide admin credentials

2) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
administrator' and receives a request to provide admin credentials

3) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
prompt to approve escalation

4) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
administrator' and receives a prompt to approve escalation

The problem is, many times the results are different. Some program will
work with one method but not another. I am not limiting this to just
installs: it could be copying files or making directories, etc, etc. I
would like to remain a regular user and supply admin credentials as
required. But that doesn't always work.

How does one know which method to use?

I can't believe it's a trial and error procedure. Am I the only one
confused here? What am I missing? What am I not getting?

Thanks in advance...

Dick

No takers, eh...

Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
obvious that no one bothers to reply.

Thanks anyway...

Dick

"Dick" <> wrote in message
news:%...
>I am confused as to when to use which method of privilege escalation and
>when. For example, there are at least 4 different ways to perform
>escalation and they seem to produce different results. I have an admin
>account defined and a regular user account that I do 99% of my work in. I
>am using Vista Home Premium, by the way. I have used the following methods
>at one time or another:
>
> 1) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
> request to provide admin credentials
>
> 2) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
> administrator' and receives a request to provide admin credentials
>
> 3) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
> prompt to approve escalation
>
> 4) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
> administrator' and receives a prompt to approve escalation
>
> The problem is, many times the results are different. Some program will
> work with one method but not another. I am not limiting this to just
> installs: it could be copying files or making directories, etc, etc. I
> would like to remain a regular user and supply admin credentials as
> required. But that doesn't always work.
>
> How does one know which method to use?
>
> I can't believe it's a trial and error procedure. Am I the only one
> confused here? What am I missing? What am I not getting?
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> Dick
>

No takers, eh...

Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
obvious that no one bothers to reply.

Thanks anyway...

Dick


"Dick" <> wrote in message
news:%...
>I am confused as to when to use which method of privilege escalation and
>when. For example, there are at least 4 different ways to perform
>escalation and they seem to produce different results. I have an admin
>account defined and a regular user account that I do 99% of my work in. I
>am using Vista Home Premium, by the way. I have used the following methods
>at one time or another:
>
> 1) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
> request to provide admin credentials
>
> 2) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
> administrator' and receives a request to provide admin credentials
>
> 3) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
> prompt to approve escalation
>
> 4) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
> administrator' and receives a prompt to approve escalation
>
> The problem is, many times the results are different. Some program will
> work with one method but not another. I am not limiting this to just
> installs: it could be copying files or making directories, etc, etc. I
> would like to remain a regular user and supply admin credentials as
> required. But that doesn't always work.
>
> How does one know which method to use?
>
> I can't believe it's a trial and error procedure. Am I the only one
> confused here? What am I missing? What am I not getting?
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> Dick
>

Em Sábado, 30 de Agosto de 2008 15:00, Dick escreveu:

> No takers, eh...
>
> Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
> obvious that no one bothers to reply.
>
> Thanks anyway...
>
> Dick

you are messing with a delicated situation, and they just want you to shut
up... before you find that are also various situations of escalate to admin
(or better SYSTEM) without using the admin password.

Hi,

That's because there's no one answer. Elevation varies by task and program.
Admin credentials are needed to run certain tasks or to modify/alter/add to
system folders. Programs designed for Vista should never need elevation
except perhaps for installation. Others, run in compatibility mode, may
require elevation for certain routines to run.

> How does one know which method to use?

Use whichever one works to accomplish the task. Vista is designed to
implement and respond to these types of requests in various ways, what you
are seeing is the result of this. Even an administrator account is not run
with elevation to prevent malware from quietly usurping it to install itself
sight unseen. So, even when running with this level account you will still
get the same prompts as when run with a regular user account. The difference
being under a regular user account you must supply admin credentials to
complete the task. When run under admin, you must simply acknowledge it.

--
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

"Dick" <> wrote in message
news:...
> No takers, eh...
>
> Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
> obvious that no one bothers to reply.
>
> Thanks anyway...
>
> Dick
>
>
> "Dick" <> wrote in message
> news:%...
>>I am confused as to when to use which method of privilege escalation and
>>when. For example, there are at least 4 different ways to perform
>>escalation and they seem to produce different results. I have an admin
>>account defined and a regular user account that I do 99% of my work in. I
>>am using Vista Home Premium, by the way. I have used the following
>>methods at one time or another:
>>
>> 1) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
>> request to provide admin credentials
>>
>> 2) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
>> administrator' and receives a request to provide admin credentials
>>
>> 3) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
>> prompt to approve escalation
>>
>> 4) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
>> administrator' and receives a prompt to approve escalation
>>
>> The problem is, many times the results are different. Some program will
>> work with one method but not another. I am not limiting this to just
>> installs: it could be copying files or making directories, etc, etc. I
>> would like to remain a regular user and supply admin credentials as
>> required. But that doesn't always work.
>>
>> How does one know which method to use?
>>
>> I can't believe it's a trial and error procedure. Am I the only one
>> confused here? What am I missing? What am I not getting?
>>
>> Thanks in advance...
>>
>> Dick
>>
>

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:46:28 +0100, Sthief Ballmer
<> wrote:

>Em Sábado, 30 de Agosto de 2008 15:00, Dick escreveu:
>
>> No takers, eh...
>>
>> Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
>> obvious that no one bothers to reply.
>>
>> Thanks anyway...
>>
>> Dick
>
>you are messing with a delicated situation, and they just want you to shut
>up... before you find that are also various situations of escalate to admin
>(or better SYSTEM) without using the admin password.

It's just Microsoft's infamous method of half-ass programming.

You see while fanboys are stupid enough to think Microsoft is the
ultimate software developer. People in the know understand that
Microsoft at best is only capable of writing mediocre software. They
expect their end users that buy their stuff to find the bugs in it
since they rely on morons like Frank to be beta testers and always
push their crap out the door before it is really tested by anyone that
actually knows what they're doing.

Sorry, the truth hurts sometimes.

wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:46:28 +0100, Sthief Ballmer
> <> wrote:
>
>
>>Em Sábado, 30 de Agosto de 2008 15:00, Dick escreveu:
>>
>>
>>>No takers, eh...
>>>
>>>Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
>>>obvious that no one bothers to reply.
>>>
>>>Thanks anyway...
>>>
>>>Dick
>>
>>you are messing with a delicated situation, and they just want you to shut
>>up... before you find that are also various situations of escalate to admin
>>(or better SYSTEM) without using the admin password.
>
>
> It's just Microsoft's infamous method of half-ass programming.

Translation: ringbastard, aka Frank's Ass Licker, has no idea what he is
talking about.
>
> You see while fanboys are stupid enough to think Microsoft is the
> ultimate software developer. People in the know understand that
> Microsoft at best is only capable of writing mediocre software. They
> expect their end users that buy their stuff to find the bugs in it
> since they rely on morons like Frank to be beta testers and always
> push their crap out the door before it is really tested by anyone that
> actually knows what they're doing.
>
> Sorry, the truth hurts sometimes.

Then the truth that you are an incompetent idiot moron piece of useless
wet **** must really hurt. An asswipe ****wit moron like you who can't
get his one little install of Vista Business to run properly and always
blames MS.
Face it you cock-sucking son of a PIG...you are the ultimate loser!...LOL!
Go fukk yourself or have bubba do it it for you, you fukkin PIG!

Em Sábado, 30 de Agosto de 2008 16:06, escreveu:

> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:46:28 +0100, Sthief Ballmer
> <> wrote:
>
>>Em Sábado, 30 de Agosto de 2008 15:00, Dick escreveu:
>>
>>> No takers, eh...
>>>
>>> Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
>>> obvious that no one bothers to reply.
>>>
>>> Thanks anyway...
>>>
>>> Dick
>>
>>you are messing with a delicated situation, and they just want you to shut
>>up... before you find that are also various situations of escalate to
>>admin (or better SYSTEM) without using the admin password.
>
> It's just Microsoft's infamous method of half-ass programming.
>
> You see while fanboys are stupid enough to think Microsoft is the
> ultimate software developer. People in the know understand that
> Microsoft at best is only capable of writing mediocre software. They
> expect their end users that buy their stuff to find the bugs in it
> since they rely on morons like Frank to be beta testers and always
> push their crap out the door before it is really tested by anyone that
> actually knows what they're doing.
that isn't exactly what i was refering... there are worse situations that
they hope nobody ever find out...

> Sorry, the truth hurts sometimes.
hummm, only to liars... (and you seen to spike a few ones allready)

regards
Balmer

Thanks, Rick, for the insight. However, I think that my point was missed.
Perhaps I didn't explain it properly. If I take a given executable, say an
install, and let's assume that it IS NOT written explicitly for Vista. I
would have assumed that whether I ran this executable as an admin (with the
appropriate UAC prompt) or as a standard user (with the prompt for admin
credentials), I would end up with the exact same results. But in fact, I
find that I do not end up with the same results. In one case, the installed
program would not run properly.

Again, which ever method that I use (as indicated previously (in the
original post), I expected the END RESULT to be the same. Can you shed any
light on this?

I appreciate you taking the time on this...

Dick

"Rick Rogers" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi,
>
> That's because there's no one answer. Elevation varies by task and
> program. Admin credentials are needed to run certain tasks or to
> modify/alter/add to system folders. Programs designed for Vista should
> never need elevation except perhaps for installation. Others, run in
> compatibility mode, may require elevation for certain routines to run.
>
>> How does one know which method to use?
>
> Use whichever one works to accomplish the task. Vista is designed to
> implement and respond to these types of requests in various ways, what you
> are seeing is the result of this. Even an administrator account is not run
> with elevation to prevent malware from quietly usurping it to install
> itself sight unseen. So, even when running with this level account you
> will still get the same prompts as when run with a regular user account.
> The difference being under a regular user account you must supply admin
> credentials to complete the task. When run under admin, you must simply
> acknowledge it.
>
> --
> 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
>
> "Dick" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> No takers, eh...
>>
>> Well, I guess that everyone is as confused as I am or the answer is so
>> obvious that no one bothers to reply.
>>
>> Thanks anyway...
>>
>> Dick
>>
>>
>> "Dick" <> wrote in message
>> news:%...
>>>I am confused as to when to use which method of privilege escalation and
>>>when. For example, there are at least 4 different ways to perform
>>>escalation and they seem to produce different results. I have an admin
>>>account defined and a regular user account that I do 99% of my work in.
>>>I am using Vista Home Premium, by the way. I have used the following
>>>methods at one time or another:
>>>
>>> 1) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives
>>> a request to provide admin credentials
>>>
>>> 2) regular user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
>>> administrator' and receives a request to provide admin credentials
>>>
>>> 3) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) and receives a
>>> prompt to approve escalation
>>>
>>> 4) admin user executes a setup.exe program (for example) with 'run as
>>> administrator' and receives a prompt to approve escalation
>>>
>>> The problem is, many times the results are different. Some program will
>>> work with one method but not another. I am not limiting this to just
>>> installs: it could be copying files or making directories, etc, etc. I
>>> would like to remain a regular user and supply admin credentials as
>>> required. But that doesn't always work.
>>>
>>> How does one know which method to use?
>>>
>>> I can't believe it's a trial and error procedure. Am I the only one
>>> confused here? What am I missing? What am I not getting?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance...
>>>
>>> Dick
>>>
>>
>

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 18:57:56 -0400, "Dick" <>
wrote:

>Thanks, Rick, for the insight. However, I think that my point was missed.
>Perhaps I didn't explain it properly. If I take a given executable, say an
>install, and let's assume that it IS NOT written explicitly for Vista. I
>would have assumed that whether I ran this executable as an admin (with the
>appropriate UAC prompt) or as a standard user (with the prompt for admin
>credentials), I would end up with the exact same results. But in fact, I
>find that I do not end up with the same results. In one case, the installed
>program would not run properly.
>
>Again, which ever method that I use (as indicated previously (in the
>original post), I expected the END RESULT to be the same. Can you shed any
>light on this?
>
>I appreciate you taking the time on this...

Get it from the horse's mouth. Listen to the entire hour long taped
interview of the two author's of UAC and in spite of them trying to
put on a brave face you'll discover for yourself why it is so screwed
up in implementation. Even they do a sort of shoulder shrug and meekly
ask for those having problems to let them know.

http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Going...-What-How-Why/