For those of you who say you don't need antivirus on vista...

[dmex]

I wouldn't call anyone a fool for not running an antivirus. I stick with calling them naive, unless they are running a unix-clone.

And as for Dmex... Are you SURE that all exploits of UAC has been fixed now? I would think that those updates actually makes the point of antivirus more significant rather than less.

mike-cow,

Antivirus has more flaws than UAC because it can be disabled by Virus`s, I have had it happen on a few systems in the past and it will happen again in the future...Only two UAC flaws in the last two years is very good considering the amount of Updates I remember seeing to protect your antivirus product from being bypassed or altered...

Antivirus is also reactive to threats, Its not proactive and thats really bad way of thinking your antivirus will protect you because your or me or anyone can write a virus today that deletes all your system files and documents and not one Antivirus will detect it, notify you or bother doing anything about it...There are many virus`s they dont know about until someone reports them and you wouldn't know it was a virus until you noticed something was different and reported it...by that time its too late because the damage has already been done...

However UAC is proactive meaning your always going to know when something attempts to change system configuration,, use protected privileges or attempt things affecting your system because UAC runs in Kernel Mode and nothing can disable or remove UAC without prompting for your permission to make a system wide change like that and your Antivirus just cant protect itself from alterations like UAC does

I always turn off UAC,is that bad?i have NOD32 and i never catch any virus,trojan etc
Whats the risk disabling UAC?

Panis,

Other than what I just mentioned above the other useful thing about UAC is it provides virtualization for all Windows applications allowing them to function properly with standard user accounts and also function properly with the changes made within Windows preventing access to core system locations like system files/directorys and places within the registry keeping these locations clean of alterations...That means better reliability and stability because these applications cant make changes to functions your system needs for stable and secure operation

I have Bit defender and so far, very happy with it, only annoying thing (perhaps my fault) is that I allowed it to take over my internet and PC for me so each time I get into a site, it asks me whether I want to accept cookies to dl to my hard drive, java script, upload cookies to said site, which, IE or FF already do that. The annoying part is to be asked the same thing for each advert the site has, it is definately to much.

Sometimes I think I should just run w/o any protection... a reformat or two a year is good for a healthy OS, kinda like cleaning your garage of all the junk you have gathered throughout the year so to speak! :D

AstaLaVista,

Bitlocker just does encryption, It doesn't do anything you mentioned




Guys,

UAC serves a necessary and useful purpose,If you dont take the time to learn how to use the added value then yes its a waste of time and anoying because you dont understand or care to use something that gives the user real power over an applications access, If your antivirus doesnt detect a new virus that explots a flaw and deletes your hard-drives then your *****and if you had UAC disabled then theirs nothing to stop that virus from doing anything it likes on your system...At least UAC will prompt you before alowing an application full sytem/administrator access...I do find it interesting how the prompts are anoying for for some users because I dont see them and I configure windows for customers daily and I have to develop applications for clients...Why is changing you system constantly so damm important, It should be used for work not playing with Windows configuration every 10 seconds

If anyone honestly doesn't realize or understand the value and usefulness about the level of protection UAC provides especially after reading my comments let alone the 6-page explanation about UAC explaining in great detail how it protects Windows greater than Antivirus or other software can and also how it helps keep a system stable and secure (6-pages of facts about UAC) from Mark Russinovich (Microsofts Kernel Developer and CoreAcitecture Guru) Then you need to reevaluate what you know about Windows and UAC

 

[bschmalz81401]

I love UAC, just not the built in UAC from MS.

Symantec has made a UAC replacement I love, It has a remember button and gives real info that some times UAC won't give.

User Access Control - Vista User Account Control - UAC | Norton Labs

Free while it is beta.

 

[dmex]

I love UAC, just not the built in UAC from MS.

Symantec has made a UAC replacement I love, It has a remember button and gives real info that some times UAC won't give.

User Access Control - Vista User Account Control - UAC | Norton Labs

Free while it is beta.

Hi Bschmalz,

UAC replacement tools can themself be replaced easily because it doesnt have access to the same hard-coded scurity functions to protect it from unauthoried bypass...It emulates UAC security but doesnt protect the same far reaching provisions

Still undecided about Windows Vista?

Steven

 

[mike-cow]

mike-cow,

looong quote shortened.

I'm not bashing UAC, it does its job. But its stupid implementation doesn't really work since *alot* of people find it annoying and get rid of it as soon as they can. Those who can't either complain alot about it or skip using vista entirely.

Running an AV will not disable UAC, and you know it. UAC is not antivirus software. It simply blocks software from running in administrator mode. Plenty of damage can be done in regular usermode and it's only a matter of time before that will be exploited too. It probably won't affect YOUR computer so often, but you'll be an unaware part of the problem. WElcome to the world of botnets.

 

[bschmalz81401]

I love UAC, just not the built in UAC from MS.

Symantec has made a UAC replacement I love, It has a remember button and gives real info that some times UAC won't give.

User Access Control - Vista User Account Control - UAC | Norton Labs

Free while it is beta.

Hi Bschmalz,

UAC replacement tools can themself be replaced easily because it doesnt have access to the same hard-coded scurity functions to protect it from unauthoried bypass...It emulates UAC security but doesnt protect the same far reaching provisions

Still undecided about Windows Vista?

Steven

This one uses Windows UAC it just gives more options and information when UAC pops up. Excample, On a new Vista box visit a site that wants to install Flash, You will get the UAC with a {12245223xfg3343343xf34343} want to install do you want to allow, Worthless information. With the Norton one you can expand the info and see that it is Flash.

 

[AstaLaVista]

I have Bit defender and so far, very happy with it, only annoying thing (perhaps my fault) is that I allowed it to take over my internet and PC for me so each time I get into a site, it asks me whether I want to accept cookies to dl to my hard drive, java script, upload cookies to said site, which, IE or FF already do that. The annoying part is to be asked the same thing for each advert the site has, it is definately to much.

Sometimes I think I should just run w/o any protection... a reformat or two a year is good for a healthy OS, kinda like cleaning your garage of all the junk you have gathered throughout the year so to speak! :D

AstaLaVista,

Bitlocker just does encryption, It doesn't do anything you mentioned

dmex, thank you but I don't understand what you are telling me as I don't run "Bitlocker", what I have is "Bit Defender Anti Virus 2009"... now I am more confused than ever since I don't even know where that UAC is at, let alone Disable it

 

[Barman58]

Just one comment on the Symantec UAC tool

As this application has the ability to stop the UAC from appearing, (previously entered "don't show again"), then unless it is completely safe it could possibly be exploited to access an Admin only process. This application is a beta, and thus unproven, this along with the fact that it is from Symantec, , would cause me to not use it.

What is more worrying IMO, is the fact that this program can bypass the UAC. Ok you have to OK the install via the UAC but the fact that the UAC can be bypassed means that the next bit of code to do this may not come from a security company.

As Mike so righly said ...

I'm not bashing UAC, it does its job. But its stupid implementation doesn't really work since *alot* of people find it annoying and get rid of it as soon as they can. Those who can't either complain alot about it or skip using vista entirely.

The good news on this is that MS has addressed the annoyance factor ith the new UAC for Windows 7 and may,(hopefully ), make this retroactively available for vista.

UAC and Anti-Malware is a PITA - Yes
Would I run Without it? - NO