• ExfilBravo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Everyone knows most people turn UAC completely off after it nags them for the 10th time and they get frustrated and dump it.

    • DrGunjah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah maybe, but if that exact same people would use linux they would sudo or 777 everything which wouldn’t be much better security wise

      • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Let me introduce you to a plethora of industry RedHat users who log into GUI as root for 8 whole hours, everyday.

        • letsgo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Sure but if you’re doing rooty stuff all day then sudo you’re sudo not sudo going sudo to sudo type sudo sudo sudo every sudo fucking sudo time sudo you sudo want sudo to sudo do sudo something. And yeah it sudo caches it for sudo a bit but sudo it’s still too sudo much.

    • lightnegative@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I turn UAC off before it nags me for the 10th time.

      The only nag I want to see is the one right before it gets turned off.

      I hate things that just throw up nag screens that users get desensitized to and just click through anyway. It hasn’t increased security at all.

      Looking at you “do you trust the authors of the code in this workspace folder” VSCode. Yes I effing do, that’s why I opened it to begin with!

      • DrGunjah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Fair enough but then you shouldn’t complain about the lack of confirmation (like the meme does)

        • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s still a valid complain, but the problem is not exactly the presence or absence of a confirmation IMO, it’s a deeper matter.

          What causes user desensitization (I guess that’s a word) is a direct result of how Windows users traditionally install software - from untrusted sources or by downloading them directly from a vendor’s website then manually installing it.

          UAC would be just fine if it was a rare thing to see, but because of this “download a .exe > double click > install” flow users see it all the time, which defeats the purpose of the warning. It became just another half-measure Windows has implemented.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            And it’s unhelpful because it doesn’t give any details about what it wants to do with that admin access and also treats permission for one action as permission for all actions (not that you can tell what they first action you’re permitting is).

            I like the way android does it, where you can grant or revoke special permissions by category of action.

            Though the system I’d like to see is one where each program is sandboxed and then even you close the program (or it prompts for an elevation), then you get a list of system differences between the sandbox and your system and can choose whether and which changes to push from the sandbox env into the main env. Or to combine sandboxes so that programs can interact with each other.