TBH i dislike system images..... they too can carry viruses without your knowledge!
I do much prefer to start from scratch no matter the time it takes to bring it back to where it was before
When I load my OS, I install the OS, I activate it, install drivers and I run Windows update and then I take a "vanilla image". This is most likely the image that I would use, if it came down to it. Saves me the hassle of doing those basic steps. I have no problems reinstalling the rest of the apps that I use...and I usually only install them once I actually need them. No sense in restoring an application that I "used to use", that I don't have a need for anymore.
Mine is off, really what's the point
Best Regards,
FredeGail
Previous to the UAC system, users of the Windows operating system pretty much universally did everything with their "administrator" level account. And this was more or less a disaster, as everytime that they would get hit with anything while logged in, they had full and unfettered access to the entire box and their boxes would be infected and chock full of viruses, spayware, malware, rootkits, keyloggers, bot nets, etc.
Other operating systems (like OSX, Linux, Unix, etc), all used a very different approach to security. The typical user would run with a standard level user account that didn't have full admin access, and upon needing to do something that required a higher level of access, these users would authenticate against the system providing either a usernname/password combo or a password to allow a single command to do what it had to do and return them to their standard privileges.
Some features, like "protected mode" within the Internet Explorer browser require that UAC be enabled to function. This protected mode, issues a medium access token (rather than the high access you would get as an admin with UAC off). Thus, the system effectively is limited to a "sandbox" area that effectively protects your real system files unless you elevate using the UAC system. And since various toolbars and Active X controls run with the same level of privs the IE process has, these have lower access controls and thus the amount of damage that they can actually do the system is significantly reduced.
Sadly, I think people who experienced the over zealous approach of UAC with Vista simply decided to turn it off and never look back. The changes made to the way UAC works in Windows 7 are much better and make it pretty non-intrusive...however some people simply haven't given it the time of day and just make it standard issue to turn it off and forget about it.
Like I said earlier in the thread, on Windows 7 workstations I always leave UAC enabled and I don't suggest that people turn it off. Is it an infallible solution that offers 100% protection? No, but then again...nothing ever is. It's a layered approach and adds to the security there. I rarely get prompted for it. I guess it's just the nature of the apps that I use. And if there was a start up program that I had to use, which required a UAC prompt, you can set this up via a scheduled task to launch and you can launch with elevated privs...so that could contain that very specific situation.
Id ike to see a poll on UAC
Im sure the trend would be that not many like it and that many have turned it off, i mean that's the general seances i get from this post anyway
I use UAC and I never shut it off. .I want to be notified if my apps are doing something on my behalf and I want to run with the least amount of privilege as possible on my system while remaining as efficient as possible. I personally feel that UAC is pretty decent in this regard.
dont get me wrong, its a nice little guard for the less savvy but not for me
I always love the mentality that I'm such a savvy user that I know exactly what I am doing and I know exactly what all of my apps are doing all of the time and I don't need this. I would think a tech savvy user would really understand what this is doing and it's inherent benefits. But I think lots of "savvy" users also like to run zillions of system optimization apps that all require UAC escalations. Rather than question whether all of these apps are really necessary...we just continue to want to run all of them and simply turn off the security measures because that 1 simple click is just way too much. I think that is why I get along with UAC, because I don't fill my system will all of this crap (driver updaters, registry cleaners, defrag utilities, benchmarking tools, overclocking software, etc). The only tools I regularly use which prompt for UAC are Acronis True Image and Malwarebytes. And I don't run these every time I touch my computer.
If i had an opinion that would affect the way we protected our pc's, it would be to educate people on what keeps them safe
And it's kinda what UAC tries to do, limit their access and make them safer. MS has been trying to educate us, and developers on this by limiting this access and introducing the UAC system...but yet many simply blow it off as "it's not intended for me" and just don't educate themselves. From a development standpoint, I would prefer my applications not need admin level access. While some are system utilities simply "need it", many simply don't....but yet they still prompt because they aren't very well written apps. Educating users is a great goal to aspire too, but the vast majority of people simply won't understand, don't care and won't listen...and then there are those who just disregard it because they obviously "know better".
