| Fred Stluka via plug on 8 Apr 2021 18:03:51 -0700 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: [PLUG] that's nice |
Walt, Good point! I've only done it when I was sure I could defend my action as harmless and in the best financial interest of the client. No one's ever gotten sufficiently annoyed to decide to not renew my contract. Of course, they WERE telling me all the time that I was saving them $15 million/year with the software I was writing for them, so they may have been a little more tolerant than otherwise. Your mileage may vary... --Fred ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred Stluka -- http://bristle.com -- Glad to be of service! Open Source: Without walls and fences, we need no Windows or Gates. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 4/8/21 7:11 PM, Walt Mankowski via plug wrote:
Changing obscure registry settings to override your organization's security and virus-checking settings on company-owned hardware and/or while on the company's VPN sounds like what we used to call a "career-limiting move". If they find out they may very well decide to fire you for ignoring company policy. Do this at your own risk. On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 06:58:41PM -0400, Fred Stluka via plug wrote:Jeff (and other PLUG folks), Even if your not a member of the Administrators group, you can probably just casually walk around any restrictions and do whatever you want. Windows has no security, only obscurity, and it's really not even very obscure. I haven't had time to write it up formally as a tip yet, but I've mapped out an entire tip series on my ongoing battle with "Captain Underpants" (as I call the collective groups of folks at Microsoft who make the high level architectural decisions). This is an excerpt I've roughed out that applies to your situation. --------------------- *Windows obscurity over security* To this day, on Windows, there's no real security. Just obscurity. So if you know what value to change and where, you can easily break into anything. Most everything is still stored in the registry, which is still an unprotected binary file with a proprietary format. So everything is supposedly obscure and secret, but nothing is really secure. And it turns out, it's not that obscure either because it's the same on every Windows PC in the entire world. Imagine you want to do something on a Windows PC, but don't have permission because a Windows "policy" set by a sys admin disallows it. just go to another PC where you have admin rights, dump the registry file to an ASCII text REG file, set the policy to allow it, then dump the registry again, and diff the 2 REG files. Copy the part that enforces the "policy" (now allowing it). Paste into into a new REG file. Apply that REG file to the target PC with the REGEDIT or REGEDT32 command. You're in! If there's a policy that says you can't apply a REG file to change that part of the registry, no worries. That policy is also stored in the registry. See where I'm going with this? Go to the other PC, dump the registry, change that policy to say you ARE allowed to edit the desired part of the registry, re-dump, diff, copy, paste, and apply to the target PC. Easy-peasy! I used this technique at a large international corp once. I was a consultant writing a web app for them. My web app needed to be allowed to do something when run by one of their users. But their was a Windows policy in place that said the users couldn't do it. So I created a REG file and pushed it to the web site. Told the users that if they got an error, just click on the REG file. Windows used its "file associations" to automatically run REGEDIT when the REG file was clicked. It updated the registry and they were now allowed to do what they needed to do. The sys admins didn't like that at all. So, they added a new policy that said users couldn't make changes to that part of the registry. So I updated the REG file to first say that, yes, they COULD make such changes, and then to proceed to make the changes. I even had it change the policy back afterwards so the new policy was still in effect, to prevent the users from accidentally being allowed to make other changes that the sys admins wanted to disallow. The sys admins never even noticed that I had casually strolled around their best efforts at "security". As with most (all?) Windows "security, it was like putting a lock on the front door and the key under a specific rock in the garden. But all Windows systems have the same lock, with the same key under the same rock. So I was easily able to find the rock (diff the 2 dumped reg files), copy the key (copy/paste into new file), open the door (run the REG file) and then put the key back under the rock (also done by running the REG file). Once I automated it like that, any user could break in with a simple click of a REG file, without having to know any of the security details. And it left the door locked behind them when they were done so no one would know they'd been there. Doh! --------------------- Once I write up the series of tips, I'll mail it to my "Windows Users" mailing list, my "Computer Security" mailing list, and perhaps a few others. And of course, post it to the Tips pages that archive mailings to those lists. Many of you are already on those mailing lists. The rest of you should feel free to subscribe at: - http://bristle.com/invite Enjoy! --Fred ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Fred Stluka -- http://bristle.com -- Glad to be of service! Open Source: Without walls and fences, we need no Windows or Gates. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 4/5/21 9:26 AM, Thomas Delrue via plug wrote:Then your only avenue is to actually talk to those who locked you out and convince them to change how that task is configured... That'll likely be a bit of an undertaking. Just like on linux, you need permissions to modify the process you want to modify. There's even a chance that they themselves don't even have the ability to change the priority of that task because it could be that it is configured by the AV installer which obviously configures it as "Highest Priority" because it's the only thing that matters in the world according to itself. You could always ask for local root as well: a no is what you have, a yes is what you could get. On 4/5/21 09:19, jeffv via plug wrote:Thanks for the info, but I don't have admin. Normally that would piss me off, but I think they did a good job of locking things down to keep us safe from ourselves (and maybe even others). The program eats everything, making opening browser tabs an event. On 4/5/21 8:53 AM, Thomas Delrue wrote:If you're a member of the administrators group, the command you're looking for is taskkill /im application.exe /f :P Otherwise, if you want to stay 'nice', you can hop into the task manager, right click on the process that eating up all your CPU and select "Change Priority". It will try to scare you out of doing that but just proceed, everything is fine. All of this will only work if you're on an account that has privileges over that process. More systemically, good luck on convincing those folks that that process should be run in a more 'nice way'. Let me know which arguments worked... On 4/5/21 08:45, jeffv via plug wrote:I'm fuming because w@rk runs virus scans which eat up every last resource. I'm all for scans, but it runs at 100% cpu for hours. I want to contact the correct people and discuss it with them...I don't know if there's a Windows command to do this... "Linux has a nice command, which can reduce the amount of resources a program is eating." What's it called? Nice. Yes, what is the nice program called. It's nice. I'm sure it is, but what's it called? Nice. Look, I understand it's nice to have this program, but what program? Nice. Ok, you fire up the program to help you. What do you run? Nice. and so on....___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug