Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Keep Yer Paws Off Your PC: Preventing End-Users from Installing Applications
ITBusinessnet ^ | 28 August 2006 | Esther Schindler

Posted on 08/29/2006 10:44:08 AM PDT by ShadowAce

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
This is only the first of 6 pages on the original site. I didn't want to post such a huge article, but it is an interesting read.
1 posted on 08/29/2006 10:44:10 AM PDT by ShadowAce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rdb3; chance33_98; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; Bush2000; PenguinWry; GodGunsandGuts; CyberCowboy777; ...

2 posted on 08/29/2006 10:44:25 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Meh. The company I work for severely restricts end-user installation of applications in a number of ways, chiefly by giving very few people admin privileges. When I complained, I was told the policy had reduced helpdesk calls by X percent (I forget how much. What difference does it make? The company isn't in the business of reducing helpdesk calls. If they didn't allow us to have computers, the calls would be reduced to zero and I don't see how we'd benefit).

For every stupid user story, there is a stupid administrator story.

3 posted on 08/29/2006 10:49:30 AM PDT by prion (Yes, as a matter of fact, I AM the spelling police)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

My last employer solved the problem (sort of). We were simply disconnected from access to the Internet. From then on employees were limited to only intranet access within the agency.

Not necessarily to prevent the downloading of mischief from the Internet, but to prevent the UPLOADING of some sensitive material, which was used in malicious ways against the interests of the agency I was with.

Life can be hard when the people with whom you work every day are not politically reliable.


4 posted on 08/29/2006 10:51:20 AM PDT by alloysteel (When in doubt, forge ahead anyway. To outsiders, it looks the same as boldness. Or plain crazy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prion
The company isn't in the business of reducing helpdesk calls.

Not entirely true. The fewer the helpdesk calls, the fewer employees are sitting around waiting for their computer to get fixed and not producing.

For every stupid user story, there is a stupid administrator story.

I agree wholeheartedly.

5 posted on 08/29/2006 10:51:42 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
...Veronica had looked at a $10,000 hardware solution,...

Just use security groups, and group policy applied to Active Directory Organizational Units.

6 posted on 08/29/2006 10:51:59 AM PDT by FReepaholic (This tagline could indicate global warming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
This article exactly describes the problems our IT overseers want to fix. However, it isn't the root problem.

I think the real problem is managers wanting technology to do their jobs for them. They don't want to personally hold their people accountable for what they do and/or install, so they want the IT department to get that responsibility. But, as the article mentions, then everyone hates IT for the restrictions. Voila! The managers have successfully avoided doing their jobs and avoided the heat as well.

My solution is this: Every user who has a workstation for which they are the exclusive (or nearly so) user should be made an administrator for that machine and be held responsible for everything they install. Any machines that are "community use" should have no administrator accounts except for IT.

The "zero-tolerance" idea of IT-only administration is what we live under at the moment. It's a disaster, as the article so ably describes. Restoring personal accountability would go a long way toward solving the issue.

IT departments are just too understaffed to test each and every application an organization needs before installing. The ethernet paradigm is more appropriate. "Get it out there fast and if it breaks, fix it." Just make sure your virus scanner is kept up to date. :-)

7 posted on 08/29/2006 10:56:59 AM PDT by TChris (Banning DDT wasn't about birds. It was about power.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prion

BUMP!


8 posted on 08/29/2006 10:59:14 AM PDT by Publius6961 (MSM: Israelis are killed by rockets; Lebanese are killed by Israelis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FReepaholic

But then it's harder to justify expanding your budget and therefore your own importance...


9 posted on 08/29/2006 10:59:44 AM PDT by farlander (Strategery - sure beats liberalism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Here at the BIG International PetroChemical Company ® over 90% of the users have locked machines. They can't even create a text file on their C drive unless it's in a folder unlocked by a software installation script.

If a desktop goes bad it can be reimaged in about an hour.

Acquiring an unlocked machine requires and act of God.

10 posted on 08/29/2006 11:02:53 AM PDT by tx_eggman (The people who work for me wear the dog collars. It's good to be king. - ccmay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prion
For every stupid user story, there is a stupid administrator story.

Ah yes. The almighty helpdesk.

Here's a little stupidity from both ends:

The Chronicles of George

11 posted on 08/29/2006 11:03:58 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (Winning shows strength. Winning without fighting shows brilliance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman
There is a way of allowing users to have unlocked machines and still be able to fix their mistakes.

Have each user log into a thin client that looks and feels like a real machine. If something goes wrong, simply restore the machine image on the server.

This has been done using a *nix-based OS on the clients, running a VM from the server. If the virtual client goes bad, merely copy that machine's image from a backup file.

Usually, the users don't even know they're on a thin client.

12 posted on 08/29/2006 11:06:49 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

I've had several jobs and placements with restrictive computer policies, and nothing makes me feel more like a faceless grunt than when they make me use the system setup they think is best for me.

Meanwhile, I worked at a company that didn't give a crap what you did on your desktop as long as you got the job done and I got more work done there than at my last two gigs combined.


13 posted on 08/29/2006 11:07:12 AM PDT by MIT-Elephant ("Armed with what? Spitballs?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

One place I was at used a Windows setup that wouldn't let you change your date/time settings. That was a real sharp one, especially when the clock got out of sync and was wrong all the time.


14 posted on 08/29/2006 11:08:18 AM PDT by MIT-Elephant ("Armed with what? Spitballs?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
"For every stupid user story, there is a stupid administrator story.

I agree wholeheartedly.

I can give you a few of those, but we won't get into it here. =)

As for the article, on Windows 2000/2003 networks using Active Directory, there are good mechanisms in place for being able to micro-manage user permissions. You can delegate authority to chosen users, and or use group policy. I believe there's equivalent ways of doing things in the Linux world.

15 posted on 08/29/2006 11:08:40 AM PDT by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
>Keep Yer Paws Off Your PC: Preventing End-Users from Installing Applications

If I were running
a business, I'd consider
using thin clients

and just take away
general purpose PCs.
Keep workers focused

on specific jobs.
Let them click around the net
on their home machine.

16 posted on 08/29/2006 11:08:43 AM PDT by theFIRMbss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

I do some work for a huge Fortune 500 company and their IT is 1950's at best. Most employees used shared workstations which are secured by a user ID of "administrator" and a blank password. As a result everyone can and does install junk, junk, junk including instant messaging software, and their bank and eBay accounts all with their IDs and passwords saved. Since several of the employees are rather unsavory, I wouldn't put it past them to install keycatchers, so I won't use those PCs for anything secure.


17 posted on 08/29/2006 11:09:34 AM PDT by JayNorth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman

"Acquiring an unlocked machine requires and act of God.

Or maybe a quick perusal of a couple of articles from 2600.

It is really very difficult to stop a privilege escalation attack if the user has an account on a box, particularly a Windows box.


18 posted on 08/29/2006 11:09:46 AM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TChris
We have a situation where all rights are granted to the administrator and nothing to the user. With the limitations that Windows causes things such as updating plug-ins and patches, changing basic functions like time before monitor goes to sleep are restricted. I do not put fault the company it lies squarely with Windows. It's either all or nothing.
19 posted on 08/29/2006 11:09:47 AM PDT by reagandemo (The battle is near are you ready for the sacrifice?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MIT-Elephant

NET TIME \\timeservername /SET /YES

In the login script will fix that. =)


20 posted on 08/29/2006 11:09:54 AM PDT by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson