Vista - Thoughts on Norton Vista UAC tool

Has anyone tried this tool. I have a friend who swears by it. I am not bothered much by UAC but why not make it better? Has anyone got good or bad to say about this? Thanks for any reviews.

User Access Control - Vista User Account Control - UAC | Norton Labs

I personnally would rather use Vista's own UAC control rather than disable features of it, and let a third party software program do it.
There could be issues resulting form hooking into the kernel- better to let Windows manage itself, than a 3rd party. There have been recent cases were Symantec flaws allowed malware to bypass the security program, UAC is a critical component of Vista, and could easily be comprimised if were disabled by third party software.

Further note-
Symantec only wants to "take Over" UAC so that their program does not have to go through the O/S checks and balances. There is a good reason why executable programs are required to do this, and it Defeats the whole aspect of UAC to allow 3rd party software that is not an integral part of Vista to disable it. In the end, the Operating System is more susceptable to Corruption and Malware as Symantec decides what can and cannot run without User intervention, and if Symantec's software should become corrupted/compromised... well, you get the picture I hope.

Hi ,

I have been using the UAC Tool for quite a while - much better than turning UAC off imo.

SIW2

Hi

Although I agree to an extent with SIW2 with regards to this tool being a better option that running without UAC I do have a major issue with this type of white listing in security matters.

As you are creating a list of programs which are allowed to operate without triggering the UAC this information must be stored in order to be available to the program. My fear is that if this information is compromised by malware the malware can then impersonate the "White listed" program and therefore defeat the UAC.

As designed the system has the user input,as a part of the mechanism, which although fallible, is not subject to hijacking by the malware

And what do you think about author's explanation concern white list?
There is a problem - Vista User Access Control - Norton Community

Interesting reply but still I have the same concerns as the parameters needed to defeat the system are still stored and thus possibly reproducible, for the sake of the odd click of UAC, which is what the user sees on a mature system, I prefer the security of the user input method. The Symantec tool is better than nothing but potentially less secure than UAC in my opinion so I will stick with UAC.

That's why we want more people to use it and tell us the issues you find , so we can fine tone the algorithms.

This does not sound good at all. That's a quote.

Hi,

I would just like to add that I have no specific problems with the actual Norton tool, apart from its default action of reporting all items on the white list, over the internet, back to Norton.

It's a worry about the concept of white listing. The likelihood of malware actually utilising the list for it's purposes are small, it's a judgement that each user has to make for themselves. Are the clicks required to run UAC worth the protection provided.

Hi,

It is beta - they want feedback. In my view, this is far, far better than any of the other apps. to make UAC less intrusive.

It still requires user input. For example if I rt click and run as admin on a Ccleaner shortcut - Norton uac prompt pops up instead of the ms uac prompt.

It has an extra box I can tick to Always allow. If I tick that then perform exactly the same action, i.e. rt click and select run as admin on that exact same shortcut - it won't prompt me.

If something else tries to run that shortcut - you get the prompt. If another shortcut, or the actual .exe is run in Program Files (x86 ) - you get the prompt.


Although it's not obvious from the website, you can uncheck the box about sending feedback to Norton during installation.

SIW2