| 1 |
On Sunday 27 April 2008, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 25 April 2008 06:45:34 Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Elog messages with yellow stars should *never* be ignored. Unlike |
| 4 |
> > UAC, they are not there with the express purpose of annoying users. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Having no knowledge of Vista, nor a wish to try it, what is a UAC? |
| 7 |
> Google tells me it's a "Universal air connection for scba", which |
| 8 |
> doesn't seem right here. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
User Access Control. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Microsoft's implementation of a "get authorisation to do this before |
| 13 |
doing it" thingy. There are two good ways to do this and a plethora of |
| 14 |
wrong ways. The right ways: |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
'su -' and become root where everything is allowed. |
| 17 |
'sudo' or a gui derivative. If the user has been authorized by root, |
| 18 |
just run the whole command with root priviledges as the user can |
| 19 |
obviously be trusted. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Microsoft's wrong way: |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Intercept every single action that requires root priviledges and give a |
| 24 |
popup to confirm. Half the time the user has no idea what the machine |
| 25 |
is on about and just clicks "Yes". Heck, I was trying to install |
| 26 |
OpenVPN on Vista and had no idea what it was on about half the time, |
| 27 |
and I have 20 years solid technical experience backing me up. WHat |
| 28 |
chance does Aunt Tilly or your grandma stand? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Microsoft's stated reason for this is to annoy users so much that they |
| 31 |
will annoy 3rd party developers who will write software that doesn't |
| 32 |
need root to install. Hmmmm. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I dunno, I have a healthy tin foil hat. Here's what I think: |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Users will become so annoyed with UAC that they will find the hidden box |
| 37 |
that says "click here to never receive these popups again" and blog it. |
| 38 |
Many users will do it, Microsoft doesn't have to bother with security |
| 39 |
all that much anymore and we are back to XP behaviour with machines |
| 40 |
infested with malware, opening up a nice revenue stream for "New! |
| 41 |
Improved! Microsoft Anti-Virus!" (and taking out Norton in the |
| 42 |
process). Except this time it's not the default behaviour, the user |
| 43 |
deliberately clicked the button so they take responsibility now and |
| 44 |
Microsoft is off the hook for deliberately shipping unsafe software |
| 45 |
that does not perform to reasonable expectations. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Sudo is so much better and infinitely less intrusive. It's also a solved |
| 48 |
problem years ago. Why didn't they use it? |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
</end of rant> |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 58 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives