Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

iphitus · 2006-06-26 01:24:12

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id … 154&size=o

ugghhh.

Cam · 2006-06-26 02:08:28

Funny, I thought the whole purpose of beta releases was to fix stuff like that. Maybe that's why the released a beta in the first place. Food for thought...
</sarcasm>

iBertus · 2006-06-26 04:54:01

** how windows reacts to a simple task **

"Windows would like permission to ask for permission to delete this file. Proceed?"

"Are you sure?"

"Are you really sure, totally?"

"Windows will now ask you to confrim deletion of every single byte. Please wait!"

BSOD, reboot!

theneutralnewt · 2006-06-26 05:04:12

Cam wrote:

Funny, I thought the whole purpose of beta releases was to fix stuff like that. Maybe that's why the released a beta in the first place. Food for thought...
</sarcasm>

I've heard that in the newest beta that's fixed, so the beta seems to have done its job.

Gullible Jones · 2006-06-26 10:28:17

But wait a minute... It goes through all these steps supposedly for security and then lets you delete it in the end?

Okay... If you're an ordinary user and it's owned by SYSTEM, you shouldn't be able to delete it... And if you're an admin it shouldn't bug you. So what the heck are they thinking? It doesn't even make sense in a "protect users from themselves" sense... :?

pauldonnelly · 2006-06-26 10:42:27

Gullible Jones wrote:

But wait a minute... It goes through all these steps supposedly for security and then lets you delete it in the end?
Okay... If you're an ordinary user and it's owned by SYSTEM, you shouldn't be able to delete it... And if you're an admin it shouldn't bug you. So what the heck are they thinking? It doesn't even make sense in a "protect users from themselves" sense... :?

I think the real issue here is that it shouldn't have been owned by System in the first place. From what I hear, Vista's permissions system is a good one; it's just that many applications still don't play nice with it (i.e. writing to places they shouldn't), and mis-assigned ownerships like this one.

iphitus · 2006-06-26 12:33:16

pauldonnelly wrote:

Gullible Jones wrote:
But wait a minute... It goes through all these steps supposedly for security and then lets you delete it in the end?
Okay... If you're an ordinary user and it's owned by SYSTEM, you shouldn't be able to delete it... And if you're an admin it shouldn't bug you. So what the heck are they thinking? It doesn't even make sense in a "protect users from themselves" sense... :?
I think the real issue here is that it shouldn't have been owned by System in the first place. From what I hear, Vista's permissions system is a good one; it's just that many applications still don't play nice with it (i.e. writing to places they shouldn't), and mis-assigned ownerships like this one.

but what good are the file permissions if applications can write to places they shouldnt.

just looking at the above set of screenshots, that's a pretty poor effort by MS there. You can see where they've hacked the permission system in between the existing setup. There's been no attempt to integrate it, despite the fact that it would simply be logical to merge some of those dialogs.

James

pauldonnelly · 2006-06-26 14:53:48

iphitus wrote:

pauldonnelly wrote:
Gullible Jones wrote:
But wait a minute... It goes through all these steps supposedly for security and then lets you delete it in the end?
Okay... If you're an ordinary user and it's owned by SYSTEM, you shouldn't be able to delete it... And if you're an admin it shouldn't bug you. So what the heck are they thinking? It doesn't even make sense in a "protect users from themselves" sense... :?
I think the real issue here is that it shouldn't have been owned by System in the first place. From what I hear, Vista's permissions system is a good one; it's just that many applications still don't play nice with it (i.e. writing to places they shouldn't), and mis-assigned ownerships like this one.
but what good are the file permissions if applications can write to places they shouldnt.
just looking at the above set of screenshots, that's a pretty poor effort by MS there. You can see where they've hacked the permission system in between the existing setup. There's been no attempt to integrate it, despite the fact that it would simply be logical to merge some of those dialogs.

I don't think they can write to places they shouldn't unless you input an admin password, or are logged on as an admin (although I do wonder why it even asks in that case). The problem is that apps try to do it anyway, since previous Windows versions' lousy security spoiled them.

I completely agree that merging them would be a good idea.

iBertus · 2006-06-26 17:15:24

But, with most Windows installs coming from OEM setups, the user is almost always logged in as admin, if they know it or not. I've got a few WinXP boxes I care for and every single one came out of the box with only an admin account and no password. If this is a pattern that continues with vista, it will not make a difference how good the permisison scheme is - it just won't be secure.

pauldonnelly · 2006-06-27 00:58:41

iBertus wrote:

But, with most Windows installs coming from OEM setups, the user is almost always logged in as admin, if they know it or not. I've got a few WinXP boxes I care for and every single one came out of the box with only an admin account and no password. If this is a pattern that continues with vista, it will not make a difference how good the permisison scheme is - it just won't be secure.

I sure hope that's not how it's done. I don't know why I care so much about Windows security, but I'd like to see it improve.

codergeek42 · 2006-07-05 02:55:27

Windows has detected movement from your mouse.  Do you wish to continue?


     [    Yes   ]    [  No   ]    [  Cancel  ]

user · 2006-07-05 03:15:17

codergeek42 wrote:

Windows has detected movement from your mouse.  Do you wish to continue?


     [    Yes   ]    [  No   ]    [  Cancel  ]

WGA has detected pirate-version on your system!!!  Do you wish to continue?


     [  Cancel  ]

deficite · 2006-07-05 05:05:09

WGA has detected pirate-version on your system!!!  Do you wish to continue?


     [  Cancel  ]

You do know that the cancel button actually cancels your life, right? Oh, the little pirates (and >25% of legit users that Microsoft claims are pirates) don't take the question "Do you wish to continue?" quite too seriously enough.

profoX · 2006-07-05 07:12:40

What about this classic?

Windows didn't detect a keyboard. Please insert a keyboard and press a key to continue

(this one actually happened in win95 or win98?)

iphitus · 2006-07-05 09:36:39

profoX wrote:

What about this classic?
Windows didn't detect a keyboard. Please insert a keyboard and press a key to continue
(this one actually happened in win95 or win98?)

what's wrong with that. if you follow the instructions there's no problems at all. and if you dont want to follow the instructions, press the power button/key.

though i'm skeptical that it actually occurred, I booted 95/98 plenty of times without a keyboard...

James

user · 2006-07-05 12:16:07

deficite wrote:

WGA has detected pirate-version on your system!!!  Do you wish to continue?


     [  Cancel  ]
You do know that the cancel button actually cancels your life, right? Oh, the little pirates (and >25% of legit users that Microsoft claims are pirates) don't take the question "Do you wish to continue?" quite too seriously enough.

here is improved version.

WGA has detected pirate-version on your system!!!
Now your system will be expired immediately, Do you wish to continue?


     [    Yes   ]    [  Yes   ]    [  Yes  ]

profoX · 2006-07-05 16:38:09

iphitus wrote:

profoX wrote:
What about this classic?
Windows didn't detect a keyboard. Please insert a keyboard and press a key to continue
(this one actually happened in win95 or win98?)
what's wrong with that. if you follow the instructions there's no problems at all. and if you dont want to follow the instructions, press the power button/key.
though i'm skeptical that it actually occurred, I booted 95/98 plenty of times without a keyboard...
James

I saw it on a site somewhere, it was something like this, actually: "Windows 95 was unable to detect a keyboard. Press F1 to continue."

I'm not sure if it really happened. And even if it did, it's not really that big of a mistake. It could happen to anyone, if you always use generic error message 'templates'.

deficite · 2006-07-05 22:00:05

There are way too many fake things like that on the internet. I booted Win95 quite a few times with the keyboard not plugged in. The cord on our keyboard would sometimes pull out of the PS/2 port. Our nice Phoenix BIOS would tell us we didn't have a keyboard plugged in though. I really loved that BIOS.

what's wrong with that. if you follow the instructions there's no problems at all. and if you dont want to follow the instructions, press the power button/key.

The problem is many times if you plug the keyboard in the PS/2 while it's running you'll have to restart the computer for it to start working. I've gotten XP to start using a keyboard that I plugged in while it was running, but I've tried it several times on Windows 9x and I've never gotten that to work.

Gullible Jones · 2006-07-05 23:34:40

IIRC you're not supposed to plug in PS/2 stuff with the power on lest you damage your mobo. No idea what the particular reason for that is.

iphitus · 2006-07-06 02:56:39

*shrug* i plug PS/2 stuff all the time on running systems.

I had an old win95 laptop that let my plug a ps/2 mouse when it was running with no problems.

James

pauldonnelly · 2006-07-06 05:28:59

Gullible Jones wrote:

IIRC you're not supposed to plug in PS/2 stuff with the power on lest you damage your mobo. No idea what the particular reason for that is.

Just old hardware, I think.

Edit: As I understand it, older motherboards had a fuse that would blow, but newer ones have auto-resetting fuses so it's not a big deal if there's a surge.

Gullible Jones · 2006-07-06 09:39:00

Ah, thanks.

Insane-Boy · 2006-07-06 13:46:26

Windows again shows that it's ROCKZ!!:]

Arch Linux

#1 2006-06-26 01:24:12

Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#2 2006-06-26 02:08:28

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#3 2006-06-26 04:54:01

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#4 2006-06-26 05:04:12

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#5 2006-06-26 10:28:17

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#6 2006-06-26 10:42:27

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#7 2006-06-26 12:33:16

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#8 2006-06-26 14:53:48

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#9 2006-06-26 17:15:24

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#10 2006-06-27 00:58:41

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#11 2006-07-05 02:55:27

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#12 2006-07-05 03:15:17

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#13 2006-07-05 05:05:09

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#14 2006-07-05 07:12:40

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#15 2006-07-05 09:36:39

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#16 2006-07-05 12:16:07

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#17 2006-07-05 16:38:09

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#18 2006-07-05 22:00:05

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#19 2006-07-05 23:34:40

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#20 2006-07-06 02:56:39

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#21 2006-07-06 05:28:59

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#22 2006-07-06 09:39:00

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

#23 2006-07-06 13:46:26

Re: Vista: Filesystem permissions gone wrong:

Board footer