If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
Joe User wrote:
On 23/09/14 04:53, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 00:14, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:28:31 +0100, Joe User wrote: Actually I think the solution is quite simple, put a password on the hidden admin account. Ça va sans dire... Does it? How many everyday uninterested users know about this I wonder. |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/14 08:26, . . .winston wrote:
Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 04:53, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 00:14, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:28:31 +0100, Joe User wrote: Actually I think the solution is quite simple, put a password on the hidden admin account. Ça va sans dire... Does it? How many everyday uninterested users know about this I wonder. How many uninterested users actually care. Well quite, or to put it another way, what you don't know can't hurt you eh? Well that I'm afraid is a very *dangerous attitude* and is guaranteed to expose you to all manner of nasty little spooks and goblins. snipped irrelevant quote and again I'm not missing the point, I see your primary role as protecting the organization (using 4 new Win 8.1 pcs) for which you benevolently chose to volunteer your services. Preaching to us here is secondary and futile especially since that charitable organization gains no additional benefit by doing so...setup those machines properly then ask what else you can do next Firstly, you have no idea what my 'primary role' is nor do I have any inclination to tell you. Suggesting you do just makes you look like an ass. Secondly, as a long time veteran of the c.o.l.a wars I know it is pointless trying to reason with someone who's blinkered outlook and entrenched refusal to admit that anything could possibly be wrong with their favorite expensive malware blinds them to the obvious and legion failures of said product. Actually I have a social conscious, not something you are apparently burdened with. It concerns me that there are millions of un-knowing innocents out there happily using something that is so insecure. There is nothing you or your fellow conspirators can say or do to convince me that a hidden unprotected Administrator account is anything other than stupid at the very least, dangerous to the average user and most disturbingly accepted as perfectly acceptable by those in a position to do most harm. Henceforth I will do everything I can to make as many people aware of this issue and will suggest that we ditch the trash, install a secure OS and sandbox the Win8.1 malware so we can use it without worrying about who's watching. I have you and your ilk to thank for opening my eyes. Kudos. -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 09/22/2014 02:54 PM, Joe User wrote:
On 22/09/14 19:33, Caver1 wrote: On 09/22/2014 12:51 PM, felmon wrote: On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:19:46 +0100, Joe User wrote: In circa 20 years of installing and configuring *nix based systems I can't remember having ever been presented with the opportunity to create any sort of adminstrator (or sudoer) account without supplying some sort of verifying credentials first. I thought with the exceptions of Puppy Linux and Knoppix? I seem to recall they run as root. but I guess one is advised against actually installing the latter, not sure about the former. Linux does not set up a root root account by default. Not so, several Linux based distributions I have experience of have a default root account with no password. A standard user is created on install and protected with a compulsory password, this user is added to sudoers I realized that I stated that wrong. When you install a Linux OS the root account is there but the user created at that time is a limited user that can elevate himself to root. Not login as root. When you log in as a sudoer you can enable the root account with sudo passwd root. That user has the privilege to elevate to root but does not login as root. That user logs in as a limited user and then at sometime that user can elevate himself as root. To elevate to root the command is either The command for elevating as root in Ubuntu, as I don't know Redhat distros, can be either sudo su, gksu with command following, sudo with command following, then enter password when prompted. You can only elevate to root temporarily. You can set up a root account and run as root but that is not recommended. Only the user set up on installation has the ability to be elevated to root. Incorrect, any account can be added to sudoers Why didn't you quote the whole statement as I did say you can give a user root privileges. Any user can be added to sudoers but you have to be root to create a new user with sudo privileges. Then as root you can limit what privileges that user has when elevated to root. http://www.wallpaperama.com/forums/h...root-t314.html You can create a user that runs as root permanently but that is not recommended. That can only be done after installation not during. As far as creating/giving a user root privileges Linux is no different than Windows in that you have to be root/Admin to be able to do so. The main difference is that Windows creates the first user as Admin where Linux creates that user as a limited user with elevation privileges. -- Caver1 |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:10:40 +0100, Joe User wrote:
On 23/09/14 08:26, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 04:53, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 00:14, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:28:31 +0100, Joe User wrote: Actually I think the solution is quite simple, put a password on the hidden admin account. Ça va sans dire... Does it? How many everyday uninterested users know about this I wonder. How many uninterested users actually care. Well quite, or to put it another way, what you don't know can't hurt you eh? Well that I'm afraid is a very *dangerous attitude* and is guaranteed to expose you to all manner of nasty little spooks and goblins. snipped irrelevant quote and again I'm not missing the point, I see your primary role as protecting the organization (using 4 new Win 8.1 pcs) for which you benevolently chose to volunteer your services. Preaching to us here is secondary and futile especially since that charitable organization gains no additional benefit by doing so...setup those machines properly then ask what else you can do next Firstly, you have no idea what my 'primary role' is nor do I have any inclination to tell you. Suggesting you do just makes you look like an ass. Secondly, as a long time veteran of the c.o.l.a wars I know it is pointless trying to reason with someone who's blinkered outlook and entrenched refusal to admit that anything could possibly be wrong with their favorite expensive malware blinds them to the obvious and legion failures of said product. Actually I have a social conscious, not something you are apparently burdened with. It concerns me that there are millions of un-knowing innocents out there happily using something that is so insecure. There is nothing you or your fellow conspirators can say or do to convince me that a hidden unprotected Administrator account is anything other than stupid at the very least, dangerous to the average user and most disturbingly accepted as perfectly acceptable by those in a position to do most harm. Henceforth I will do everything I can to make as many people aware of this issue and will suggest that we ditch the trash, install a secure OS and sandbox the Win8.1 malware so we can use it without worrying about who's watching. I have you and your ilk to thank for opening my eyes. Kudos. Bugger off Lindroid troll |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/14 18:02, Caver1 wrote:
On 09/22/2014 02:54 PM, Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 19:33, Caver1 wrote: On 09/22/2014 12:51 PM, felmon wrote: On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:19:46 +0100, Joe User wrote: snip Not so, several Linux based distributions I have experience of have a default root account with no password. A standard user is created on install and protected with a compulsory password, this user is added to sudoers I realized that I stated that wrong. When you install a Linux OS the root account is there but the user created at that time is a limited user that can elevate himself to root. Not login as root. This isn't a Linux group is it so I'm not sure this is the correct place for this discussion. I suggest you read the relevant man pages as you seem a little confused about a number of commands and their exact semantics. snip You can create a user that runs as root permanently but that is not recommended. That can only be done after installation not during. I'm sorry but this is simply incorrect. All of the distros that I am familiar with create a root account on installation. No password is assigned thus preventing anyone logging in as root. To enable the root account a sudoer sets the password from the command line, until that time the root account cannot be accessed, this is quite different from the hidden unprotected Administrator account lurking in the shadows of your Windows 8.1 machine. Some distros, notably Slackware create and set the password on the Root account during installation, you then log in as Root from the start. Download and install Slackware if you don't believe me. As for the rest of your reply, please read the relevant man pages. -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/14 18:25, steve wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:10:40 +0100, Joe User wrote: snip Bugger off Lindroid troll Ha ha, very funny. Do you know DanC? -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:18:06 +0100, Joe User wrote:
You are (possibly deliberately) missing the point. You are (perhaps not deliberately) making me laugh out loud. Well, OK, it's just a wry smile... -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:42:11 +0100, Joe User wrote:
On 23/09/14 18:25, steve wrote: On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:10:40 +0100, Joe User wrote: snip Bugger off Lindroid troll Ha ha, very funny. Do you know DanC? No I don't know him..I've seen his posts of course. I must say he is interesting. At least I didn't call you a drooling stooge. Now bugger off noob |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/14 18:47, steve wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:42:11 +0100, Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 18:25, steve wrote: On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:10:40 +0100, Joe User wrote: snip Bugger off Lindroid troll Ha ha, very funny. Do you know DanC? No I don't know him..I've seen his posts of course. I must say he is interesting. At least I didn't call you a drooling stooge. Now bugger off noob Never going to happen fanboi. -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/2014 18:25, steve wrote:
Bugger off Lindroid troll You can't say such things to a linux junkies. He has been sent here to rubbish Windows 8.1 can't you understand this? Linux junkies seems to feel very lonely because there isn't much going on in Linux Operating system so they come here and post completely unfounded rubbish branded as facts and research. It is time to let them die silently. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/14 20:36, Good Guy wrote:
On 23/09/2014 18:25, steve wrote: Bugger off Lindroid troll You can't say such things to a linux junkies. He has been sent here to rubbish Windows 8.1 can't you understand this? Linux junkies seems to feel very lonely because there isn't much going on in Linux Operating system so they come here and post completely unfounded rubbish branded as facts and research. Oh my, you really don't have a clue do you. Some of your own 'MVPs' seem to agree with me that it isn't "completely unfounded rubbish branded as facts and research" http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/w...4-71aa0f40397b Do try to keep up. -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
Joe User wrote:
On 23/09/14 08:26, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 04:53, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 00:14, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:28:31 +0100, Joe User wrote: Actually I think the solution is quite simple, put a password on the hidden admin account. Ça va sans dire... Does it? How many everyday uninterested users know about this I wonder. How many uninterested users actually care. Well quite, or to put it another way, what you don't know can't hurt you eh? Well that I'm afraid is a very *dangerous attitude* and is guaranteed to expose you to all manner of nasty little spooks and goblins. snipped irrelevant quote and again I'm not missing the point, I see your primary role as protecting the organization (using 4 new Win 8.1 pcs) for which you benevolently chose to volunteer your services. Preaching to us here is secondary and futile especially since that charitable organization gains no additional benefit by doing so...setup those machines properly then ask what else you can do next Firstly, you have no idea what my 'primary role' is nor do I have any inclination to tell you. Suggesting you do just makes you look like an ass. Secondly, as a long time veteran of the c.o.l.a wars I know it is pointless trying to reason with someone who's blinkered outlook and entrenched refusal to admit that anything could possibly be wrong with their favorite expensive malware blinds them to the obvious and legion failures of said product. Actually I have a social conscious, not something you are apparently burdened with. It concerns me that there are millions of un-knowing innocents out there happily using something that is so insecure. There is nothing you or your fellow conspirators can say or do to convince me that a hidden unprotected Administrator account is anything other than stupid at the very least, dangerous to the average user and most disturbingly accepted as perfectly acceptable by those in a position to do most harm. Henceforth I will do everything I can to make as many people aware of this issue and will suggest that we ditch the trash, install a secure OS and sandbox the Win8.1 malware so we can use it without worrying about who's watching. I have you and your ilk to thank for opening my eyes. Kudos. Keep in mind you presented the problem and asked what is our solution for said problem. qp OK, here's the problem. I'm a volunteer for a local charity. Recently we received a grant to replace our aging equipment and got 4 spanky new computers running Windows 8.1. A wide range of people have access to these machines including the elderly, the homeless, the unemployed the disadvantaged, dispossessed, and other groups on the outskirts of society. We have no idea who's using the machines at any moment as I and the other reasonably competent volunteer can't be there all the time. We *know* someone has been trying to get into the guts of the things and now we are beginning to understand how they might be doing it. ====== ****What is our solution?***** /qp Your obvious role lacking any other valid information is to resolve your stated problem. The solution is simple - protect all admin accounts and setup standard user accounts for any users including the elderly, the homeless, the unemployed, the disadvantaged and other outskirts of society to ensure no one, not even you, can compromise the users and the service provided by the charity's computers (not yours, being just a volunteer). If you feel obliged to be the savior for all of mankind's Windows 8.1 computers don't be too surprised when the only person genuflecting is in the mirror. Who knows the charity might even receive more 8.1 computers...maybe you can protect those admin accounts too. What you've effectively done and sad to say is that you've used a charitable organization's grant of '4 spanky new computers running Windows 8.1' as a soapbox for your 'Look what I found'. -- ...winston msft mvp consumer apps |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 23/09/14 21:34, . . .winston wrote:
Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 08:26, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 04:53, . . .winston wrote: Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 00:14, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 11:28:31 +0100, Joe User wrote: snip What you've effectively done and sad to say is that you've used a charitable organization's grant of '4 spanky new computers running Windows 8.1' as a soapbox for your 'Look what I found'. You really do have a vivid imagination don't you. -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 09/23/2014 01:39 PM, Joe User wrote:
On 23/09/14 18:02, Caver1 wrote: On 09/22/2014 02:54 PM, Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 19:33, Caver1 wrote: On 09/22/2014 12:51 PM, felmon wrote: On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:19:46 +0100, Joe User wrote: snip Not so, several Linux based distributions I have experience of have a default root account with no password. A standard user is created on install and protected with a compulsory password, this user is added to sudoers I realized that I stated that wrong. When you install a Linux OS the root account is there but the user created at that time is a limited user that can elevate himself to root. Not login as root. This isn't a Linux group is it so I'm not sure this is the correct place for this discussion. I suggest you read the relevant man pages as you seem a little confused about a number of commands and their exact semantics. snip You can create a user that runs as root permanently but that is not recommended. That can only be done after installation not during. I'm sorry but this is simply incorrect. All of the distros that I am familiar with create a root account on installation. No password is assigned thus preventing anyone logging in as root. Redhat asks for a root password upon installation, you cannot go further without setting the root password. Then you set up a regular user which uses the su command using the root password to elevate to root. Debian you can setup a root account when installing but you don't have to. If you do you also provide a root password. If you don't then the first normal user is set up with sudo privileges. Ubuntu no root account only normal user with sudo privileges. OpenSuse no root on installation. Arch sets up root with password. Then set up a normal user, then give sudo privileges. Puppy is made for single user only and as it is made for live running not install there is no need to protect the system. Gentoo you set a root password and create a normal user. Gentoo recommends that you give the normal user sudo rights and not use root. Distros that are based on the above normally follow the conventions of that which they are based on. All Linux distros that I have looked at recommend that you do not login as root. To enable the root account a sudoer sets the password from the command line, until that time the root account cannot be accessed, this is quite different from the hidden unprotected Administrator account lurking in the shadows of your Windows 8.1 machine. Some distros, notably Slackware create and set the password on the Root account during installation, you then log in as Root from the start. Download and install Slackware if you don't believe me. That's true. Slackware also recommends that the first thing that you do after installation is create a non root user with sudo privileges and login with that user and not root. As for the rest of your reply, please read the relevant man pages. Bye -- Caver1 |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Windows 8.1 user accounts, you have GOT to be kidding.
On 24/09/14 15:17, Caver1 wrote:
On 09/23/2014 01:39 PM, Joe User wrote: On 23/09/14 18:02, Caver1 wrote: On 09/22/2014 02:54 PM, Joe User wrote: On 22/09/14 19:33, Caver1 wrote: On 09/22/2014 12:51 PM, felmon wrote: On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 10:19:46 +0100, Joe User wrote: oh jeez, are you still droning on about this snip You can create a user that runs as root permanently but that is not recommended. That can only be done after installation not during. I'm sorry but this is simply incorrect. All of the distros that I am familiar with create a root account on installation. No password is assigned thus preventing anyone logging in as root. I think this is a wind up, did you actually read what you wrote before you posted it? Redhat asks for a root password upon installation, you cannot go further without setting the root password. Because it is setting up a root account. Then you set up a regular user who uses the su command using the root password to elevate to root. su stands for switch user, if there is no root account there would be nothing to switch to would there, look, there's even a home directory. [fool@windup ~]$ su Password root@windup:/home/fool# cd root@windup:~# pwd /root root@windup:~# read the man pages for su and sudo, you're still confused. I really can't be bothered with the rest it's like talking to a brick wall -- Not confused, just ... bewildered |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|