Index
> Windows > Drop Your Rights (XP application only) - Update v1.1Goto page 1, 2 Next |
| Author |
|
|
revolution 26 Dec 2008, 09:47
Browsing the Web and Reading E-mail Safely as an Administrator
I have converted the original MS DropMyRights app to asm. It allows you to run as an administrator and access Internet data safely by dropping unnecessary administrative privileges when using any tool to access the Internet. What this means is that you don't have to logout from your admin account and then login as a normal user just to run some app (like firefox). You get the full OS protection of a restricted user account but still be logged in as an admin. Just use like this: DropMyRights firefox.exe Setup/modify a shortcut for your browser and never have to be concerned about having your browser running as an admin. Easy as that. It is only a 3kB executable and it terminates as soon as the target app has started so there is no overhead to using it. It has three options for restricted rights:
Version 1.1 allows you to pass parameters to the target application. Use quotes around the {path} field and type the entire command line inside. See the virustotal result, 0/39, no detections. If you get some other result then delete it and try to download again.
|
|||||||||||
26 Dec 2008, 09:47 |
|
|
revolution 26 Dec 2008, 12:27
ManOfSteel: I agree with you 100%. But unfortunately many many people do run as admin (for whatever reason). This tool could be a convenience to them until they can convince themselves that always running as admin is not the best way to do things.
|
|||
|
26 Dec 2008, 12:27 |
|
|
LocoDelAssembly 26 Dec 2008, 18:30
Quote: See the virustotal result, 0/39, no detections. If you get some other result then delete it and try to download again. http://www.virustotal.com/analisis/ef31cbd1f2a9edf7f4dd817e853c032a Although I found unneeded the re-download I did it anyway and virustotal said I have already submitted the file. Are you sure you have uploaded the version which is pleasant to F-Secure? I ask because it is supposed that any PE file generated with the official fasm cannot pass the scanning with zero detections. BTW, would you like this thread to be moved to Projects and Ideas? [edit]Aahh! What a cheater are you, you uploaded to virustotal the ZIP file, not the executable!  |
|||
|
26 Dec 2008, 18:30 |
|
|
asmcoder 26 Dec 2008, 21:17
[content deleted]
Last edited by asmcoder on 14 Aug 2009, 14:54; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
26 Dec 2008, 21:17 |
|
|
dacid 26 Dec 2008, 21:48
or vista with UAC on
|
|||
|
26 Dec 2008, 21:48 |
|
|
revolution 26 Dec 2008, 23:54
LocoDelAssembly wrote: [edit]Aahh! What a cheater are you, you uploaded to virustotal the ZIP file, not the executable! asmcoder wrote: i recommend runas /? dacid wrote: or vista with UAC on |
|||
|
26 Dec 2008, 23:54 |
|
|
revolution 26 Dec 2008, 23:59
LocoDelAssembly wrote: BTW, would you like this thread to be moved to Projects and Ideas? |
|||
|
26 Dec 2008, 23:59 |
|
|
dacid 31 Dec 2008, 19:38
a good distraction
 keep up the good work! |
|||
|
31 Dec 2008, 19:38 |
|
|
wht36 11 Jul 2009, 17:44
Very nice program and conversion!
LUA prevents the user from modifying the system folders / program files directory (among other things). This means that you can't install or uninstall many programs without entering into admin mode (as many programs need to put uninstall info, dll's etc into windows folder). Some people may find this a hassle. I am running as LUA at the moment, and I find it irritating that many programs do not automatically recognise LUA and put their stuff in the user directory (instead, they attempt to store stuff to the system folders, and then quits with errors when they can't do so). |
|||
|
11 Jul 2009, 17:44 |
|
|
ManOfSteel 12 Jul 2009, 07:56
wht36 wrote: This means that you can't install or uninstall many programs without entering into admin mode You can also "run [it] as" and just type the admin password without logging out or switching users (XP and up). wht36 wrote: I find it irritating that many programs do not automatically recognise LUA and put their stuff in the user directory (instead, they attempt to store stuff to the system folders, and then quits with errors when they can't do so). Because they are badly-designed or outdated software. If the program constantly needs to write files in its own directory, just don't install it under "Program Files". One interesting thing I've found (on my computer at least) is that all OSS software use the proper locations (HKCU hive key and %AppData%), but only few proprietary software do. |
|||
|
12 Jul 2009, 07:56 |
|
|
f0dder 12 Jul 2009, 12:02
ManOfSteel wrote: If the program constantly needs to write files in its own directory, just don't install it under "Program Files". ManOfSteel wrote: One interesting thing I've found (on my computer at least) is that all OSS software use the proper locations (HKCU hive key and %AppData%), but only few proprietary software do. |
|||
|
12 Jul 2009, 12:02 |
|
|
pete 13 Jul 2009, 06:00
I wasn't aware of this problem, till now. Thank you for the source too. I didn't recognize yet that FASM has an "du" directive for defining unicode-strings.
P.S.: have you recognized the "Target"/"Start in"-path in the "Setting the Icon and Run Mode" chapter from your MS-link? |
|||
|
13 Jul 2009, 06:00 |
|
|
ManOfSteel 13 Jul 2009, 11:46
f0dder wrote:
Why break the hierarchy's permission inheritance and introduce exceptions? I find it more orderly to segregate those misbehaving applications from the rest. f0dder wrote:
Ok, bolds and underlines are useful. The fact is, ON MY COMPUTER, out of 25 OSS and 21 proprietary applications (freeware or not), I have 3 proprietary and 0 OSS misbehaving applications. The ratio for misbehaving proprietary applications was much higher a few years ago, but since then, I've been replacing them with OSS. Many OSS software begin in the *nix/*nix-like world. For them, using %AppData% and HKCU is just like using /home/<user>. It's the natural order of things for them. Many proprietary software programmers wipe their rears with protocols and standards, or use outdated methods (e.g. .ini files in the Windows/WINNT or Program Files directories). And users are not much better. Most of them are annoyed when properly-written software use the right locations instead of the program's directory. pete wrote: P.S.: have you recognized the "Target"/"Start in"-path in the "Setting the Icon and Run Mode" chapter from your MS-link? It's in the properties of every shortcut to an exe file. Is that what you're asking? |
|||
|
13 Jul 2009, 11:46 |
|
|
Borsuc 13 Jul 2009, 13:39
ManOfSteel wrote: Because they are badly-designed or outdated software. But registry? Worst possible thing to happen. Just imagine how hard it is to migrate or update your current configs. I LOVE apps that write to their own folders, because I can put them on a USB stick and have them configured forever, unlike crappy apps who need "installations" and centralized settings and shit like that. 
most "commercial" software also writes shitload of crap in the registry compared to OSS, which usually doesn't even use the damn registry. _________________ Previously known as The_Grey_Beast |
|||
|
13 Jul 2009, 13:39 |
|
|
revolution 13 Jul 2009, 13:52
Borsuc: The problem with software writing to it's own folders is one of security. There is always a trade-off when security is involved. If you like apps that write their own folders then you also have to deal with apps (like malware) writing to other apps folders and creating havoc. Centralised settings have kind of the same problem but all that happens is that you have to reconfigure (i.e. restore from backup) just the settings and not the whole set of apps.
|
|||
|
13 Jul 2009, 13:52 |
|
|
bitRAKE 13 Jul 2009, 14:19
Does that mean some people prefer to buy their malware?
 |
|||
|
13 Jul 2009, 14:19 |
|
|
pete 14 Jul 2009, 06:19
ManOfSteel wrote:
No, i was just pointing out that the use a path with the bad "w*rez" word. |
|||
|
14 Jul 2009, 06:19 |
|
|
guignol 06 Sep 2009, 16:14
Last edited by guignol on 15 Sep 2009, 10:21; edited 1 time in total |
|||||||||||
|
06 Sep 2009, 16:14 |
|
|
revolution 06 Sep 2009, 16:25
guignol wrote: Why, is there anything wrong with me? |
|||
|
06 Sep 2009, 16:25 |
|
| Goto page 1, 2 Next < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|