Microsoft update with User rights ?

"matte" wrote in message
news:2821F7A6-911E-4F57-A65D-9E80C1B7D84D@microsoft.com...
> Shouldn´t you be able to use automatic updates with Microsoft
> update when
> you are logged in as an ordinary user ? (Not admin)


If any user could change the state of the operating system, what would
be the point of admin accounts? You aren't using Windows 9x anymore
that had no security.

One should think that Security Updates from Microsoft should be able to be
installed with the proper rights anyway. (Should somehow be run with another
account than the logged in user. But I suppose that there aren´t any way to
solve that)

The choice you have now is either to skip security updates (Which I think no
one recommends) or to make all users admins which would meen that they could
do anything with the machine, which is another security problem.

Doesn´t anyone have any wonders about this ?

If you haven´t got a central administration for application-installations
(That can be run with system rights) how do you solve it ?


"Vanguard" wrote:

> "matte" wrote in message
> news:2821F7A6-911E-4F57-A65D-9E80C1B7D84D@microsoft.com...
> > Shouldn´t you be able to use automatic updates with Microsoft
> > update when
> > you are logged in as an ordinary user ? (Not admin)
>
>
> If any user could change the state of the operating system, what would
> be the point of admin accounts? You aren't using Windows 9x anymore
> that had no security.
>
>

"matte" wrote in message
news:FD6E7D84-BA14-465E-B3E4-2CFED0DC9F19@microsoft.com...
>
> "Vanguard" wrote:
>
>> "matte" wrote ...
>>>
>>> Shouldn´t you be able to use automatic updates with Microsoft
>>> update when
>>> you are logged in as an ordinary user ? (Not admin)
>>
>> If any user could change the state of the operating system, what
>> would
>> be the point of admin accounts? You aren't using Windows 9x
>> anymore
>> that had no security.
>
> One should think that Security Updates from Microsoft should be able
> to be
> installed with the proper rights anyway. (Should somehow be run with
> another
> account than the logged in user. But I suppose that there aren´t
> any way to
> solve that)
>
> The choice you have now is either to skip security updates (Which I
> think no
> one recommends) or to make all users admins which would meen that
> they could
> do anything with the machine, which is another security problem.
>
> Doesn´t anyone have any wonders about this ?
>
> If you haven´t got a central administration for
> application-installations
> (That can be run with system rights) how do you solve it ?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/wsus/bb466199.aspx

In a corporate environment, they run a SUS host that pushes out the
updates that the *corporation* (i.e., their IT department) wants you
to have. The employees are not local admins of the workstations.
Even if they are granted to be domain admins, they are limited to just
the one workstation that is assigned to them.

In a home environment, YOU are the admin so it is up to you to do the
updates. That means logging on under the local Administrator account
or another local admin-level account and doing the updates.

All updates change behavior. They also can themselves introduce
problems. It is still code. If the code you had before was broken
then why not the updates, too? Some updates are not desired. YOU are
the admin and supposed to be reading up on each update's details to
determine if they apply to you. Just because you choose to blindly
install updates, even critical ones, doesn't absolve you of the
respsonsibility of being your own admin.