Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
New posts
All threads
Latest threads
New posts
Trending threads
Trending
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New ads
New profile posts
Latest activity
Free Ads
Latest reviews
Search ads
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Contact us
Latest ads
Ad icon
Video Content Creator
pramukag
Updated:
Sunday at 6:10 AM
Ad icon
QA Engineer Intern
pramukag
Updated:
Sunday at 6:07 AM
Ad icon
Sell your Land, House on idamata.lk for FREE
sajith.xp.pk
Updated:
Thursday at 9:03 AM
Handmade Character Soft Toys
anil1961
Updated:
Jun 23, 2026
Bodim.lk out now !
Manoj Suranga Bandara
Updated:
Jun 21, 2026
Electronics
Vehicles
Property
Search
Reply to thread
Forums
Computers & Internet
News & Discussion
Microsoft: UAC Can Be Hijacked by Social Engineering
Get the App
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Anusha" data-source="post: 317531" data-attributes="member: 828"><p>Microsoft's UAC in its Vista operating system release was meant to signify that finally, the company has gotten serious about securing Windows by limiting a user's rights during day-to-day computer usage. It's come to signify something much less than security or trust in the minds of some security experts, though. Security expert Joanna Rutkowska kicked off the dissection of UAC in her blog, and the latest salvo against User Account Control was heaved by Symantec Research Scientist Ollie Whitehouse with a Feb. 20 posting titled An Example of Why UAC Prompts in Vista Can't Always Be Trusted.</p><p></p><p>The upshot: Microsoft has admitted that yes, UAC is liable to social engineering. The idea behind User Account Control is to limit user privileges as much as possible for most of a user's interaction with the desktop. User rights are elevated only when necessary for administrative tasks, at which point a dialog box prompts the user to OK the escalation. Limiting normal permissions is a good thing, given that it reveals less operating system surface for an attacker to latch onto. The problem, according to Whitehouse, is the level of trust granted to UAC prompts—a level of trust that he thinks is undeserved.</p><p></p><p>View: <a href="http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2098552,00.asp" target="_blank">The full story</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Anusha, post: 317531, member: 828"] Microsoft's UAC in its Vista operating system release was meant to signify that finally, the company has gotten serious about securing Windows by limiting a user's rights during day-to-day computer usage. It's come to signify something much less than security or trust in the minds of some security experts, though. Security expert Joanna Rutkowska kicked off the dissection of UAC in her blog, and the latest salvo against User Account Control was heaved by Symantec Research Scientist Ollie Whitehouse with a Feb. 20 posting titled An Example of Why UAC Prompts in Vista Can't Always Be Trusted. The upshot: Microsoft has admitted that yes, UAC is liable to social engineering. The idea behind User Account Control is to limit user privileges as much as possible for most of a user's interaction with the desktop. User rights are elevated only when necessary for administrative tasks, at which point a dialog box prompts the user to OK the escalation. Limiting normal permissions is a good thing, given that it reveals less operating system surface for an attacker to latch onto. The problem, according to Whitehouse, is the level of trust granted to UAC prompts—a level of trust that he thinks is undeserved. View: [URL="http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2098552,00.asp"]The full story[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Awruddata maasa keeyada?
Post reply
Top
Bottom