The Great UAC Debate!


UAC  

1412 members have voted

  1. 1. Do You Use UAC?

    • Yes
      477
    • Yes, On "Silent Mode"
      91
    • No (I use an Admin Account)
      496
    • No (I use a Standard Account)
      39
    • I don't use Windows Vista
      118
  2. 2. Have You Ever Been Saved By UAC?

    • Yes
      226
    • No
      932
    • I don't use Windows Vista
      106


Recommended Posts

It really is no wonder Windows has such a horrible security reputation that persists even to this day: It seems that a large portion of its user base simply doesn't care about security.

If you know what you're doing, UAC won't help much. UAC helps those who don't know what UAC is but end-users with a bit of intelligence to question what's happening and not simply click allow or cancel blindly.

I myself changed the UAC setting from completely off to on in quiet mode with TweakUAC. At least the admin rights are elevated when I want to install something and don't want to get bothered by it because I know what I'm doing & clicking.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
If you know what you're doing, UAC won't help much. UAC helps those who don't know what UAC is but end-users with a bit of intelligence to question what's happening and not simply click allow or cancel blindly.

I myself changed the UAC setting from completely off to on in quiet mode with TweakUAC. At least the admin rights are elevated when I want to install something and don't want to get bothered by it because I know what I'm doing & clicking.

Yeah silent mode is still more secure. I think it's just dumb to turn it completely off when you can use silent mode.

I found out how to turn it off like 6 months ago, which was pivotal.

I actually like Vista, especially since that feature had been turned off.

...and no it didn't save me. I'm sure it did some people though.

As a hobby during off hours and occasionally during work hours, I persevere to help people with various software-related issues. On a regular basis I have to show people how to disable and enable certain features of their XP-based systems. Surprisingly a huge amount of Windows users are still using XP. Unsurprisingly, this kind of hesitation is brought about from a well-placed fear for Vista's instability.

Vista boasted a list of features that users have been craving since some of the early releases of XP, but there were flaws. Naturally, bugs, glitches, and eventually crashes are ultimately native to all software. Especially high-demand operating systems like the Windows platform. One of the best-yet-underrated features of MS Windows Vista is User Account Control, sometimes called User Access Control (UAC) is so discredited for it's persistant annoyance anytime someone wants to change the system configuration, install programs, or affect the registry.

Here's the fact about UAC. UAC can prevent unauthorized installation (and in some cases, authorized installation) of malicious software by forcing the user to pay attention to nearly everything affecting their system. One of the problems is, people go into "autopilot" and have a habit of clicking OK/YES/ACCEPT on every prompt without actually reading the description and scrutinizing unrecognized applications or registry entries.

When UAC is off, you're susceptible to the mounting plague of viruses spyware and malware invading the internet, p2p software and even offline networks. Even though UAC isn't 100% effective at preventing malicious viral attacks, I have been saved several times when moving data from portable/external drives to PCs.

If you're an advanced user and can solve viral issues yourself, it's not really a big deal. However, if you're not willing to spend hours trying to recover your system, can't afford industry-level virus protection, and simply don't have persistant internet access to receive virus /trojan definition updates on a regular basis, you might consider turning UAC back on.

If you're insistant on disabling the UAC utility in Windows Vista, I urge you to consider a 3rd party option. They can be as or even more effective in preventing these sorts of infections/attacks. Here's a few of the more popular ones to consider.

AVG Antivirus (Free).

I have used this with XP since I discovered it in 2006 and have had unparalelled success in stomping and preventing infections.

Spybot Search & Destroy (free)

Spybot kills spyware, plain and simple, but it also blocks literally thousands (possibly in the hundreds of thousands) of threats to your system. It includes an Immunization tool as well which (with current updates) prevents the installation of over a hundred-thousand infections. The program also includes an array of advanced mode features which include a system integrity scanner / registry scanner and startup config utility. Spybot also includes two plug-ins which provide UAC-like support, but are not nearly as persistantly annoying. Some email support is also included.

ClamWin (Free)

This powerful light-weight virus scanner (found at portableapps.com) updates in less than a minute. It has an ultra light-weight memory footprint, supports file, folder, drive, entire system scans. It's robust with usable features, and downsizes on the things that don't fall under "Virus Scanner".

______________________________________________________________________

  • 2 weeks later...

Surely not using UAC means you're an Admin user? So what does:

No (I use a Standard Account) - Mean?

The Aministrator account and Standard Accounts with UAC off are effectively the same.

p.s - There's next to no reason anyone should ever completely disable UAC. Given that it's the prompts and not security people hate, simply set it to Silent mode. Problem sorted.

Security Software alone isn't really enough. UAC works with not instead of security software. If the Security Software fails UAC will prevent access to the System folders.

Edited by bradavon

I turn UAC off as part of my standard Vista install. I would class myself as a very competant Windows user and know how to maintain an install. The only reason I would consider enabling UAC is if I was going to ditch my anti-virus and needed a little extra assurance.

I turn UAC off as part of my standard Vista install. I would class myself as a very competant Windows user and know how to maintain an install. The only reason I would consider enabling UAC is if I was going to ditch my anti-virus and needed a little extra assurance.

Just put uac in silent mode, no prompts bothering you + extra assurance.

Has UAC been improved? I just upgraded from Home Premium x86 to Vista Ultimate x64 and I don't get confirmation messages as much as before, and I'm using just about the same applications. Anyone notice this? Or is it just me?

Then again, I did upgrade to Norton Antivirus 2009 Gamer Edition instead of the good ol' Kaspersky. But I doubt that'll make a difference.

  • 2 weeks later...

To be honest, I'd actually let it on.

Had it been not too effective. There are many application, be it games, or even completely different, that sometimes use lua modding etc.

UAC does not prompt, no window comes up, but it does not allow the changes from many of these things to take effect.

I use UAC, on the highest settings. I will say that sometimes (very rarely) it causes problems with certain executables in that they will never load, and it will just be waiting for the UAC prompt to come up and ends up slowing the entire system down considerably. I've only experienced this on one program installer, and generally have never had any problems. It can be circumvented by installing through the command prompt.

To be honest, I'd actually let it on.

Had it been not too effective. There are many application, be it games, or even completely different, that sometimes use lua modding etc.

UAC does not prompt, no window comes up, but it does not allow the changes from many of these things to take effect.

For Apps that fail, right click and Run as Admin.

Turning UAC off means Malware can run as Admin too (like XP). No Anti-Malware software is 100% effective.

  • 1 month later...
I never got viruses or spyware running XP with an admin account, so why should I need UAC popping up and annoying me all the time.

It doesn't pop up all the time, unless you're constantly doing things that require elevation, and there's no reason why you would be.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Although I totally see the benifits of UAC, it annoys me, therefore as a tech savvy user I trust myself enough to leave it turned off

It's not about trusting yourself. It's about trusting the applications you use and the web sites, good or bad, you visit. By turning UAC off, you trust that such things won't change any system settings or install applications to system directories without your say so. Which is what can happen now that UAC is off. Therefore, you do not see the benefits of UAC. If you truly did see the benefits, you would have left it on.

In the end, I do not see UAC prompts often enough or in places I feel they shouldn't be to consider them annoying. The benefits of UAC far outweigh any potential annoyances it could provide.

  • 1 month later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Just pull a 4Chan and ignore the UK gov, or better troll them. It's not like they can enforce the fine across border.
    • It has NEVER been shown that all these overreaching creepy methods of surveillance have ever saved a child or prevented a terrorist attack. Not a single one. It's the kind of people like you who just wave it away as "paranoid conspiracy" that makes big tech and governments this creepy mass data hoarding entities. Not only that, 3/4 of these surveillance ideas undermine the very foundations of safe online communication because they always want to have a backdoor in everything "just in case" they might need it to... checks the notes "save the children". If you put a backdoor into encryption chain there is no encryption chain anymore. You know what encryption keeps safe? Your medical records, your online shopping and credit card during payment, your photos in the cloud, your emails, your passwords, everything. There is ZERO guarantee only the good guys will use it. And if you think police suddenly can't apprehend child abusers because of encryption, Epstein was running his entire sex trafficking ring using GMail which is not even encrypted end to end. Or to make matters even worse, USA has a **** and a good buddy of Epstein as a president. Absolutely NOTHING has been done to address it. Maxwell just got a better "hotel" room as a reward. This clearly shows how they absolutely don't really care about the children but they care about the absolute control over all of us. And you're defending them here. Good grief. On top of constant attempts to insert backdoors into encryption chain, the entire age verification nonsense is again entirely over reaching, creepy, invades everyone's privacy with premise of yet again "protecting the children" instead of demanding device makers to provide simple and powerful tools for PARENTS to control how their children use devices and what they do on them. THIS would be the way, not the stupid age verification for everyone. Imagine if government would be dictating companies how their phones work and not the company's IT department. The parents should be the IT department to their children. And for everyone excusing "they are not knowledgeable enough" buuuuuulsheat. We live in a digital age, if you have children now, you absolutely are well versed in digital everything at least to basic extent. If you're not, how do you even function in these times then? Reality is that parents are just lazy and don't want to deal with this. They want government to raise their kids because they are too busy scrolling stupid Instagram and Tiktok or some bs.
    • You could make the argument that K should not be included, but FC, the fried chicken, is not the framework, it's the product. It's the Paint in Paint.NET. A closer analogy is if KFC included the name of the deep fryer they used. HennyPennyFC.
    • Flying as the central point eh... As a massive Spyro fan who has replayed the Reignited Trilogy three times and the originals 4 times... I have some doubts, but maybe...
    • Apple is expanding Private Cloud Compute beyond its own data centers by Pradeep Viswanathan At WWDC 2026, as part of the improved Apple Intelligence capabilities, Apple today announced that it is expanding Private Cloud Compute (PCC), its privacy-focused cloud infrastructure for Apple Intelligence, beyond its own data centers for the first time. Private Cloud Compute was designed to handle Apple Intelligence requests that are too complex to run fully on-device. The PCC system does not store user data and does not allow Apple or anyone else to access user requests. Last year, Apple also expanded its Security Bounty program with rewards of up to $1 million for researchers who could find serious vulnerabilities in PCC. Until now, Apple's PCC data centers were using Apple's own silicon. As part of the expansion, Apple is working with Google and NVIDIA to run new Apple Intelligence workloads on Google Cloud systems powered by NVIDIA GPUs. Apple will be using this new infrastructure to execute more demanding AI tasks while maintaining the same privacy and security guarantees of PCC. The new implementation uses NVIDIA Confidential Computing with NVIDIA GPUs, Intel CPUs with TDX, and Google’s Titan chip. Apple says it has worked with Google to build additional protections beyond a traditional confidential computing deployment. Despite the expansion to third-party data centers, Apple claims that its core PCC requirements remain unchanged, including stateless computation, no privileged runtime access, non-targetability, and verifiable transparency. The company highlighted that it will continue to control the PCC software stack, and Apple devices will only trust PCC software that has been cryptographically approved by Apple. To take security to the next level, Apple mentioned that it is maintaining an append-only ledger of Google Cloud hardware that is part of the PCC fleet. The company claims this will help reduce the risk of supply chain attacks. In addition to AI infrastructure, Apple also worked with Google to use technologies behind the Gemini family of models to build the next generation of Apple Foundation Models to power Apple Intelligence features across on-device and cloud workloads. As expected, for more demanding AI tasks like agentic tool use and complex reasoning, Apple will rely on the expanded PCC infrastructure running on Google Cloud. The expansion of PCC on Google Cloud will gradually ramp toward the full set of protections during the summer preview period. As before, Apple will also publish binaries for public inspection, provide research tooling, and give researchers access to live PCC nodes in research mode through the Apple Security Bounty Program.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Very Popular
      Captain_Eric earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • One Month Later
      amusc earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      222
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      92
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      86
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      81
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!