B
BaltaisGulbis
The so-called user account control is not as important as some people say - at least this is the way I see the situation.
Why?
1. The only thing the so-called UAC does is reducing the number of notifications you get. As as I see it (correct me if I am wrong) it makes less difference than people think. There is a possibility that some malicious apps will do things without the user's permission - but as far as I know most malware is installed as bundleware or attachments to fake emails WITH THE USER'S PERMISSION. Yes the user just did not read the instructions carefully enough and clicked the installer buttons too fast, but technically the user PERMITTED malware to be installed. User's fault? Yes. Be more careful next time? Yes. But the Big Brother a.k.a. the internal KGB that loves to restrict the user's rights to work with his own machine is useless against real malware. A failed KGB chasing tellers of political jokes while real spies go uncaught and unnoticed.
2. The Big Brother a.k.a. internal KGB is not an antivirus and does not replace an antivirus (correct me if I am wrong.)
3. As I see it (correct me if I am wrong) the only reason of the internal KGB is to be overprotective when not needed, and to fail in situations when real malware gets in. Just like an advertiser wants to bug everyone with his ads, the Big Bro wants to bug every user with total control. Better for absolute beginners? Maybe. But not all users are absolute beginners. Some could customize their settings and get rid of the Big Bro.
4. The user is the weakest part of the system ''user and machine'' and, when the user fails, Big Bro is useless.
If this is the wrong place to ask questions like that (nobody likes bad opinions and nasty questions) I will need to ask them elsewhere.
Continue reading...
Why?
1. The only thing the so-called UAC does is reducing the number of notifications you get. As as I see it (correct me if I am wrong) it makes less difference than people think. There is a possibility that some malicious apps will do things without the user's permission - but as far as I know most malware is installed as bundleware or attachments to fake emails WITH THE USER'S PERMISSION. Yes the user just did not read the instructions carefully enough and clicked the installer buttons too fast, but technically the user PERMITTED malware to be installed. User's fault? Yes. Be more careful next time? Yes. But the Big Brother a.k.a. the internal KGB that loves to restrict the user's rights to work with his own machine is useless against real malware. A failed KGB chasing tellers of political jokes while real spies go uncaught and unnoticed.
2. The Big Brother a.k.a. internal KGB is not an antivirus and does not replace an antivirus (correct me if I am wrong.)
3. As I see it (correct me if I am wrong) the only reason of the internal KGB is to be overprotective when not needed, and to fail in situations when real malware gets in. Just like an advertiser wants to bug everyone with his ads, the Big Bro wants to bug every user with total control. Better for absolute beginners? Maybe. But not all users are absolute beginners. Some could customize their settings and get rid of the Big Bro.
4. The user is the weakest part of the system ''user and machine'' and, when the user fails, Big Bro is useless.
If this is the wrong place to ask questions like that (nobody likes bad opinions and nasty questions) I will need to ask them elsewhere.
Continue reading...