|
|
|
|
|
If There's One Vista Feature with a Bad Rap, It's UACClaims Microsoft |
By Marius Oiaga, Technology News Editor
26th of May 2008, 09:45 GMT
Adjust text size:  
|
| |
|
If there's one Windows Vista feature deeply misunderstood and with a bad reputation, it's User Account Control. Microsoft confirmed officially that UAC has a bad rap but,
at the same time, the software giant's perspective over the matter is that UAC deserves better if not, at least, a second chance. The Redmond company compared Vista with UAC disabled with a house with no locks, and warned end users not to trade off security for easy access. This because, in the end, although it does not act as a security boundary, UAC does provide an extra mitigation adding a layer of protection for end users.
"One reason this feature is misunderstood is because UAC isn't a single feature; it's a set of technologies to help end users run with standard user privileges, and reserves Local Administrator privileges for IT staff or limited specific circumstances," Microsoft revealed. The User Account Control has been set in place as a watchdog for any code, application, user, process, malicious in nature or genuine that attempts to manipulate key aspects of the operating system from the registry to the file system, and to kernel layers.
"Part of the advantage of UAC is precisely the difference between standard and administrator privileges, such that any action that cannot be handled by a standard user must be handled by a user with administrator rights," Microsoft added. "A key goal of UAC in Windows Vista is to help nudge Independent Software Vendors towards designing applications that function in standard user mode."
Unlike Windows XP, which was generally run with administrative privileges even for standard users, Vista and UAC limit admin rights effectively, reducing the impact surface of potential attacks by locking them out of the critical areas of the platform.
And believe it or not, the UAC has actually proved it's worth the trouble in a recent benchmark involving anti-rootkit solutions performed by AV-Test. A total of six rootkits were able to infect Windows Vista, but not until the User Account Control had been taken out of the equation.
"The review on Windows Vista included just six samples which run well on Vista, covering [two versions of the Sony rootkit (XCP/First4Internet rootkit) found on CDs and one copy of the Alpha DVD (Settec) rootkit used on the German DVD Mr. and Mrs. Smith], two versions of Hacker Defender, as well as one copy of NT-Illusion and a copy of Vanquish. These rootkits are a little older, but still work well on Vista as long as User Account Control (UAC) has been switched," AV-Test representatives Andreas Marx and Maik Morgenstern explained.
|
|
| Rating: |
|
Good (3.8/5) |
6 vote(s) so far |
|
|
|
|
User opinions: |
| Comment #1 by: Hussian Nabz on 26 May 2008, 13:20 GMT |  reply to this comment | I think UAC feature is quite cool because it adds better security and it is harder for a hacker to install something without your permission. I have been using Vista since it came out and I have not had major problems with it but sometimes I do get fed up of UAC but in the end it is a good feature and it is likable by me. |
| Comment #2 by: Charls on 26 May 2008, 14:52 GMT | reply to this comment | "The Redmond company compared Vista with UAC disabled with a house with no locks"
Yes, in my house each time I want to get something from the icebox I open the padlock... |
| Comment #3 by: Sloeberke on 26 May 2008, 18:00 GMT | reply to this comment | I cannot agree with MS.
1. UAC is insufferable (everybody agrees on that).
2. The more MS defends this monster, the less it will be accepted by the community (psychological effect).
3. I suggest that MS takes it out os Vista AND ONECARE.
4. I suggest that MS does her homework again with a new, fresh, young bunch of beta-testers (instead of the oldies who think that they still rule today's IT and customer world). |
|
|
|
