| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
How to fix three "broken" features of Vista | |
|
||
| Time: 00:00 EST/05:00 GMT | News Source: Blorge | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Certain problems with Vista won’t be fixed by service packs or by updates but rather were actually part of the design. Users got used to XP and the way XP did things but Vista does some things differently. To help get your sanity back here are three things you can do to make Vista more amiable. First, let’s tackle UAC. Vista’s UAC enables account controls which requires you to specify program actions when they need elevated permissions. The problem is that almost every action in Vista will require such. This can be turned off while still leaving the more important virtualization protection in place. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 315 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:44:13 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 2/26/2008 8:43:24 AM |
|
Shoot it; it's lame.
|
| #2 By 8556 (12.210.39.82) at 2/26/2008 11:43:47 AM |
| The Quiet Mode of TweakUAC takes care of the biggest gripe about UAC with my customers. The repeat nags are gone while leaving UAC in place. |
| #3 By 2960 (72.196.195.185) at 2/26/2008 12:23:48 PM |
|
Does the :
netsh int tcp set global autotuninglevel=disabled Actually help? I got a big jump in network performance with SP1. Will this help even more? TL |
| #4 By 60455 (68.186.182.236) at 2/26/2008 12:51:57 PM |
|
@3, No.. and perhaps, yes, Sir
It depends upon what you connect to and what you connect through. Where auto tuning is supported, one will receive a substantive increase in performance. Where tuning is not enabled or supported, your system will fall back on its defaults, which would be at least as high as they are on remote clients/hosts that do not support auto tuning, and or larger frames (not all frames are of equal size and even Jumbo Frames are sized differently). By the way, delays occur when the tuning process requests larger frames and as it waits for a response thay may never come, or as delivery is adjusted on the fly (where auto-tuning adjust traffic mid-stream) and the remote host cannot scale with the Vista client. SP1 modifies this behavior. I would not disable tuning unless you see slow downs with remote hosts you regularly traffic and I would look at both ends before considering what to do. I would also execute the following command (and restart the computer): netsh interface tcp set global ecncapability=enabled *Beginning with SP1 for W2K3 server, that product supported auto-tuning. Please read this article to get more information about this subject. It is among my favorites. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetmag/issues/2007/01/CableGuy/default.aspx Read the RFC's, too. They can be dry for many people, but if you really want to get the most out of what is possible, it can be great fun to experiment. We play games with this stuff to see who can send the most data the fastest. |
| #5 By 60455 (68.186.182.236) at 2/26/2008 1:00:59 PM |
|
also @3, please read, http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878122.aspx
Test and note if your router supports ECN. If it does, execute the command above for all Vista clients you have on your network and enjoy the increase in performance. (netsh interface tcp set global ecncapability=enabled) There is a free test tool here, http://www.microsoft.com/windows/using/tools/igd/default.mspx |
| #6 By 17996 (131.107.0.105) at 2/26/2008 1:48:04 PM |
|
"Quiet mode" is *almost* as bad as just turning off UAC completely.
First of all, what this tool calls "quiet mode" is the exact same thing as going to the Local Security Policy MMC snapin > Local Policies > Security Options > User Account Control: Behavior of the elevation prompt for administrators in Admin Approval Mode, and setting it to "Elevate without prompting." The snap-in offers this explanation for that setting: "• Elevate without prompting: This option allows the Consent Admin to perform an operation that requires elevation without consent or credentials. Note: this scenario should only be used in the most constrained environments." In other words, if any piece of code that runs on your system wants to do something that normally would have caused a UAC prompt to show up, it now won't show up and will be permitted automatically. This is bad because it HIDES prompts that you, the user, were NOT expecting. Let's take an example. The article and the tools' blog tout that the benefits of UAC remain -- specifically, you still are a standard user, and that IE still runs in protected mode. But what good does this do you when anything can elevate silently to administrator? So let's say you browse using your favorite browesr (Firefox, or protected mode IE) to a site that happens to be taking advantage of an unpatched browser flaw to do "something bad." The code that the site executes will be in the context of the browser, so that avenue of attack is still blocked. However, now that elevation is automatic, all that the site needs to do is execute some program (or create a COM object) that it knows will run elevated, and feed the correct data to that program. That program will do the "something bad" on the malicious site's behalf and you, the user, will never have a chance to do anything about it. So isn't it bad that the program/COM object can be fed data that makes it do something bad (e.g. delete files)? No, because those programs/objects are designed to only function AFTER the user has given consent. In other words, in thread modeling lingo, there is a trust boundary between the malicious site and the administrative program. By taking away the UAC prompts you are allowing anyone to cross that boundary silently. In the end, "quite mode" UAC is slightly more secure than UAC disabled completely, because at least the malicious site can't do the bad stuff directly; it just needs to find someone to do its work for it. In other words, it requires the hackers to write slightly more clever code -- that's all it does. |
| #7 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 2/26/2008 2:17:45 PM |
|
Thanks a lot tritium; very detailed and informative posts.
I ran the test, verified that my switch support ECN and enabled it using the command string you provided. Thanks again. |
| #8 By 2201 (78.32.103.51) at 2/26/2008 2:17:51 PM |
| #6 all true and that's why I'd rather keep it on. In any case, most people won't see it in normal useage anyway. However, to be fair, the "quiet" mode of UAC renders the whole security similar-ish to XP anyway so it's not as if it's more vulnerable than that OS. |
| #9 By 82766 (202.154.80.82) at 2/26/2008 4:47:57 PM |
|
#8 - you are basically correct when you said "so it's not as if it's more vulnerable than that OS" but... the point of Vista was to make it far more secure than XP - which with UAC properly turned on, it achieves. No one should ever hide the UAC prompts.
edit: grr spelling :) This post was edited by MyBlueRex on Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 17:03. |
| #10 By 28801 (71.58.231.46) at 2/26/2008 6:35:26 PM |
|
“That is, when you attempt to do an administrative task, you will be allowed to proceed automatically, without prompting you to confirm the operation. All other features of UAC would still be enabled: the programs will run with the standard user permissions by default, and the standard users will still see the elevation prompts (the quiet mode applies to the administrator accounts only).”
What’s the problem here? You shouldn’t be doing everyday tasks with an admin account anyway. This only relieves the annoying prompts while logged in as an administrator to perform administrative tasks. If you are browsing porn as an admin with UAC in quiet mode, then you deserve what you get. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 315 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:44:13 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
