Re: Windows XP multiple users; Feedback on XP multiple user

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

From: pjp (pjp_is_located_at__at__hotmail_._com)
Date: 03/16/04 

Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:10:05 -0400

I'm also relatively new to XP but have been avid pc professional for 20
years. That said, I'm extremely disappointed/confused with the way security
seems to work in XP. Ignoring some "harder to find and designate" (e.g.
Power User etc.) groups, everyone seems to have to belong to either an
Administer, User or Guest group. You designate security by simply what group
they are in. You control the security by controlling what that group is
allowed to do.

No-where can I find anywhere to designate that I want "User A" to be able to
do "this" while "User B" can't. It's just "user group" can either do or not
do "this".

What I expected to find was that when logged in as Administrator, I could
pull up a dialog box of all "known" users. I could then designate a specific
user and set their specific "policy". I also expected to easily be able to
create both additional groups and additional policies and control in minute
detail EXACTLY what that policy allowed, e.g. down to things like "no
navigation of any sort up from "home" folder in open/save dialogs, no right
click mouse on anything, no can do ... whatever, can do "this".

GD it, my house, kids and wife aren't a call center with robots at the desk.
I don't dare allow any of them to be Administrator but my wife knows
considerably more than my older who knows more than my younger child and I'd
like to be able to specify certain "policies" for each individually. No one
on these XP newsgroups has answered the query in over a month now and I've
not been able to find anyway to do it although I'm more or less sure it can
be done if one can figure out where and what to do within the registry
itself, e.g. manually.

Full security model demands using NTFS formatted hard disk as it appears
that's how navigating around the hard disk (exploring) is controlled. This
means that if anything goes severely wrong, you'll not be able to simply
boot with an old DOS startup floppy and copy any files etc. you might want
off the hard disk easily. I've already found booting using the XP cd to get
to a command prompt lacking and clearly not what I want, e.g. still enables
some controls.

Hardly no-where can I find any details on what's actually being "set" etc.
regarding setting up a network. Help tells you little to nothing with going
online for additional help being futile. Everything seems to have to fit
into some wizard. This same lack of information so one can control things
"manually" extends thru the whole package. For example, ask about what a
specific service actually does (rather than just some catchphrase or "bunch
of letters") and it'll not help at all. I often seem to find myself doing
the cyclic lookup bs, e.g. a-> see b -> see c -> see a and go round again.
Another favorite is 'if this service isn't running then "other" services
that depend on this service ..." without stating what those "other" services
even might be!!! In other words, guess, reboot and see what's screwed up to
find out if you should or shouldn't have done something!!!

I can see it coming and fear the worst ... You'll have to be internet
connected when using MS OS so you belong to some group and that user of that
group pays this much for this use of that feature.

"jdbacz" <jbaczews@smiths-aerospace.com> wrote in message
news:e1d901c40b73$1f7b37d0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
> Hi,
>
> I have a brand new PC running Windows XP.
> Day 1 my connection to the internet was blazing fast using
> a cable modem. I then installed multiple users with
> limited access for the other users. Shortly after this,
> my connection to the internet slowed down noticeably.
> When switching between users, the system leaves "Compaq
> connection agent" application running on original user.
> The CPU runs at 100% for as long a 10 to 60 seconds.
>
> Compaq's Help recommends that I reload the system from
> recovery disk.
> 1. Can anyone help with this problem?
>
>
>
> 2. I'm also looking for general feedback on multiple
> users for Windows XP. Research I did indicates there
> appears to be general kinks with it. When it works things
> are fine. When it doesn't work it's a big headache.
>
> I generally understand the benefits of multiple users but
> I'd appreciate others weighing in on the benefit/
> headaches of multiple users.
>
> Thanx

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Windows XP multiple users; Feedback on XP multiple user
    ... You designate security by simply what ... You control the security by controlling what that group is ... > that's how navigating around the hard disk is controlled. ... >> I generally understand the benefits of multiple users but ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize)
  • [NEWS] eSeSIX Thintune Thin Client Multiple Vulnerabilities
    ... Get your security news from a reliable source. ... All Linux-based Thintune models with firmware version 2.4.38 and prior ... REMOTE ROOT SHELL / BACKDOOR ... ica con_0_10 - password for first ICA connection ...
    (Securiteam)
  • [NEWS] HelixPlayer Based Players Format String
    ... Get your security news from a reliable source. ... media player for Linux, Solaris (versions for other operating systems are ... between 0x0822** - 0x082f** and with control of one pointer at a time ... $ An open security advisory #13 - RealPlayer and Helix Player Remote ...
    (Securiteam)
  • Re: why microsoft choose mfc rather than wtl?
    ... to lower security settings, etc. ... For a client to get ... the particular AX control is never accessed, shown, or downloaded. ... unethical to deliver an automobile to customers because it is possible ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)
  • Re: Linux security
    ... that is in Windows NT-based systems out of the box. ... Why do you want that fine level of control? ... level of control over security?" ... a file system is a different beast altogether. ...
    (Ubuntu)