Re: Administrator Rights?

[Caeser Augustus <caeser.augustus () gmail com>]

Hi Gerald,

Is that CSDVersion key that you were talking about?

Thanks


On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 12:26:52 -0800, geraldf () westernsaw com
<geraldf () westernsaw com> wrote:
> Morning,all:
>
> I don't believe this is entirely correct.  The Admin credentials do need to
> be present and verified, but the "run as" secondary logon is sufficient.
> Someone with Admin credentials does not have to be the primary logon for the
> updates to fire and install.
>
> I am not dead sure what you are implying with the "Windows update will not
> install ANY update if the Admin is not logged on." statement.  I have been
> using the "runas" method in our company for over three years, and other than
> an occasional hickup where Admin or otherwise the update service just stops
> functioning, every pc just updates like a clock once a day no matter who is
> logged on to the pc.  The odd update failure seems to involve a reg entry
> that gives a corrupt version that I manually change, and off it goes again.
>
> Servers, of course, are a different story.  To set those up with "auto
> update" without any sandboxing should only be done if your resume is updated
> and your next prospective employer is in sight.
>
> Good luck, and kudos to MSFT on the Update service.  I don't see anyone else
> doing anything even remotely close to this level of customer service.
>
> The driver updates included in this service are a real blessing.  Any
> printer vendor, for example, that comes onsite is immediately quizzed on
> whether they participate in the MSFT update service.  If not, adios.  I
> consider a vendor who doesn't participate actively in this driver update
> service to be jacking up the TCO (total cost of ownership) to my company to
> save themselves some cash.  Canon is the worst at this...zero participation,
> zero email notification of new drivers.  They just don't seem to get it.
>
> Gerald
> Investment Advice
> > If you bought $1000 worth of Nortel stock one year ago, it would now
> > be worth $49.
> >
> > If you bought $1000 worth of Budweiser (the beer, not the stock) one
> > year ago, drank all the beer, and traded in the cans for the nickel
> > deposit,you would have $79.
> >
> > My advice to you is to start drinking heavily....
> > And save your cans!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Caeser Augustus [mailto:caeser.augustus () gmail com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 8:07 PM
> To: security-basics () securityfocus com
> Subject: Re: Administrator Rights?
>
> Hi,
>
> Windows update will not install ANY update if the Admin is not logged on.
> If you are running XP, then I have noticed that going through with the pre
> SP1 updates is a pain nowadays. They seem to download OK but fail to
> install.
> Manually installing the updates may be an option, but I also wonder if the
> XP systems are using the new V5 site or the older V4 one.
> On a seperate note, for the updates to work properly with the V5, an update
> is required. If WIndows update does not install it automatically then, you
> may install it seperately from
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=b93356b1-ba43-480f-
> 983d-eb19368f9047&displaylang=en
>
> And you may also have a look at
> http://www.experts-exchange.com/Operating_Systems/WinXP/Q_21220580.html
>
> Hope this helps:
>
> On 1 Dec 2004 03:31:58 -0000, dmorrow5 () satx rr com <dmorrow5 () satx rr com>
> wrote:
> > I'd like to think I'm somewhat computer savvy, but this one escapes
> me...running XP, trying to run Windows Update. All but one or two updates
> will fail. I've done some research that suggested a necessary service may
> not have started, but this is not the case. When looking at the user
> account, they are designated as Administrator. However, Windows Update says
> it won't install the updates unless it's accomplished by an administrator.
> Any suggestions?
>
> >