I just discovered a program called "Smart UAC Replacement 1.0".

McAfee Site Advisor
-------------------
Well-respected security researchers have analyzed the software available
from this site and found that it offers little or no security protection and
may use deceptive sales tactics.
http://www.spywarewarrior.com/rogue_anti-spyware.htm

So say we all
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=1294312

"Steve Riley [MSFT]" wrote in message
news
In general, it's a bad idea to use third-party "replacements" for critical
parts of the operating system. While I'll never claim that our software is
bug-free, I feel pretty certain that some shady no-charge download that
tries to replace or improve on some aspect of the security subsystem
hasn't gone through any kind of testing like we do: the SDL, automated
fuzz and penetration testing, and threat modeling. My advice: stay away
from stuff like this.

--
Steve Riley

http://blogs.technet.com/steriley
http://www.protectyourwindowsnetwork.com



"Victek" wrote in message
...
I just discovered a program called "Smart UAC Replacement 1.0". It's
supposed to, well, replace regular dumb UAC. I haven't tested it yet and
I don't know if it has anything to do with the true UAC mechanism in
Vista. FWIW it claims to also work with XP and Windows 2000. I'd be
interested to know what others think about this (once you get over the
revulsion and disgust g) Here comes the link:

http://www.replaceuac.com/



Quote:
Our fifth product - Smart UAC Replacement - was developed to help Windows
Vista users get rid of irritating User Account Control alerts while raising
the overall level of computer protection up to new height. We combined five
years of computer security experience with one year of development to bring
you this state of art product which will make your work and entertainment
really pleasant. With help of Smart UAC Replacement you don't need to worry
of your computer security anymore.
End Quote

WOW they combined five years of computer security experience with one year
of development. Look out MS, looks like you have competition here :)
They also raised the overall level of computer protection up to new height.
Well now, isn't that just wonderful. How high is this new protection, can't
seem to find any comparison with their product. I find it amazing 3 people
can come up with such software and expect most users to believe it is better
than what MS has developed and spent many hours and dollars on. They also
want people to believe they created a way to put UAC in the so called silent
mode so their software can take over.

Quote:
Once installed, Smart UAC will automatically disable standard UAC, or,
better to say, turn it into special "silent mode".
End Quote

They better clarify exactly what they mean here because there is a big
difference between disabling UAC completely or changing a Registry Key to
not prompt the user. A small quote from Ronnie Vernon MS=MVP
Quote:
If UAC cannot notify the user that a program is trying to
gain global access to the system, then it is effectively 'disabled'. This so
called 'quite mode' setting just changes a UAC registry setting to
'automatically elevate everything without prompting'. This means that when
you click to open a file, it is 'assumed' that you already know that the
file will have unrestricted access to your computer.
End Quote:

If all they do is the Registry hack then UAC is still running and their
software as well, that sure don't seem to be a smart way of programming.
Also reading over their site I see they have a integrated antivirus and anti
spyware scanner included. Just what we all need, another CrapWare Suite.

BTW Steve, couldn't agree with you more and that my nickels worth on this
thread.

--
All the best,
SG

Is your computer system ready for Vista?
https://winqual.microsoft.com/hcl/
Want to keep up with the latest news from MS?
http://news.google.com/nwshp?tab=wn&ned=us&topic=t
Just type in Microsoft

Steve Riley [MSFT] wrote:
In general, it's a bad idea to use third-party "replacements" for critical
parts of the operating system. While I'll never claim that our software is
bug-free, I feel pretty certain that some shady no-charge download that
tries to replace or improve on some aspect of the security subsystem hasn't
gone through any kind of testing like we do: the SDL, automated fuzz and
penetration testing, and threat modeling. My advice: stay away from stuff
like this.


Hmm. Linux is built on the philosophy of using third-party replacements
for badly written components of the OS. Often times, those third party
replacements get incorporated into the OS itself.

Come to think of it, MS has done it in the past. (Defender anyone?)



And no, I am NOT suggesting that the programs mentioned here are in
anyway reliable or even not virii/spyware themselves. As other people
have suggested, the origin gives a significant pause for concern. I am
only saying that the suggestion that "third party replacements are
defacto bad" is a suspect ideology.


--

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes
Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes

"Chris Barnes" wrote in message
...
Steve Riley [MSFT] wrote:
In general, it's a bad idea to use third-party "replacements" for
critical parts of the operating system. While I'll never claim that our
software is bug-free, I feel pretty certain that some shady no-charge
download that tries to replace or improve on some aspect of the security
subsystem hasn't gone through any kind of testing like we do: the SDL,
automated fuzz and penetration testing, and threat modeling. My advice:
stay away from stuff like this.


Hmm. Linux is built on the philosophy of using third-party replacements
for badly written components of the OS. Often times, those third party
replacements get incorporated into the OS itself.

Submission, peer review, and acceptance may play a part. Then,
what exactly does "third party" mean in the GNU/Open Source
arena.

Come to think of it, MS has done it in the past. (Defender anyone?)

GUI anyone?

And no, I am NOT suggesting that the programs mentioned here are in anyway
reliable or even not virii/spyware themselves. As other people have
suggested, the origin gives a significant pause for concern. I am only
saying that the suggestion that "third party replacements are defacto bad"
is a suspect ideology.

It is not the third party ideas that are security risks as much as the
actual
code used to implement them. When the idea is adopted and implemented
by the OS writers it may actually be a good thing, but no longer a third
party thing.

People shouldn't be too hard on Vista and UAC for the way it is
set up by default - it is configurable enough to be made as insecure
as almost any previous OS from Microsoft.

I installed on my computer and I have 2 annoying problems with it:
1) When Windows starts up, Windows blocks it from starting up
2) I keep getting pop up messages that it needs permission to continue
for my screensavers, Trend Micro Internt Security and Google Update even
though I've checked Always allow this program

I am thinking about uninstalling it.


--
davinp

As for me, I'm enjoying Smart UAC Replacement as it really has made my
computer less annoying. I think it's time to stop discussing and
download the software because it may become paid!


--
brooks1983
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com

As for me, I'm enjoying Smart UAC Replacement as it really has made my
computer less annoying. I think it's time to stop discussing and
download the software because it may become paid!


--
brooks1983
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com

I DLd this and it worked like a champ for about 3 days. Suddenly, I started
getting BSOD crashes at boot-up, and the only thing I could decipher from
the blue screen readout was a mention of Smart UAC. Booting in Safe Mode
and uninstalling it fixed the problem. Too bad, because I really liked it a
lot better than the stock UAC.

Buddha

"brooks1983" wrote in
message ...

As for me, I'm enjoying Smart UAC Replacement as it really has made my
computer less annoying. I think it's time to stop discussing and
download the software because it may become paid!


--
brooks1983
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com

I DLd this and it worked like a champ for about 3 days. Suddenly, I started
getting BSOD crashes at boot-up, and the only thing I could decipher from
the blue screen readout was a mention of Smart UAC. Booting in Safe Mode
and uninstalling it fixed the problem. Too bad, because I really liked it a
lot better than the stock UAC.

Buddha

"brooks1983" wrote in
message ...

As for me, I'm enjoying Smart UAC Replacement as it really has made my
computer less annoying. I think it's time to stop discussing and
download the software because it may become paid!


--
brooks1983
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com