Forum Thread: non-admin usage and missing software

You are currently viewing a forum thread in the Secunia Community Forum. Please note that opinions expressed here are not of Secunia but solely reflect those of the user who wrote it.

This thread was submitted in the following forum:
PSI

This thread has been marked as locked.
juju22 non-admin usage and missing software
Member 26th Aug, 2010 18:43
Ranking: 1
Posts: 2
User Since: 26th Aug, 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: FR
Hello,

I'm using for some time PSI and it's a useful software.

As I upgraded to win7, I observed a missing point. it seems you can't use PSI without admin rights. I don't see why.
I want standard user to have PSI automatically launched and remember there is softwares to update. only when there is install, we need admin rights. (except if there is some scan in restricted area but in this case, a checked option need to allow to process without it)

thanks

This user no longer exists RE: non-admin usage and missing software
Member 27th Aug, 2010 08:45
Hi,

The PSI makes use of some restricted drivers, and other features that could make non-administrative usage problematic. Futhermore, since the PSI needs access to the entire hard drive, running it as a non-administrative user would be problematic. And either way, an administrative user is required to actually install the needed patches.

hope this helps.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
juju22 RE: non-admin usage and missing software
Member 27th Aug, 2010 08:52
Score: 1
Posts: 2
User Since: 26th Aug 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: FR
I see at least 2 common options

- have the state database in a shareable path, but most probably read only so standard user can be informed of system state. Update would only be done by admins locally or remotely.

- like anti-virus, have a service running a separated account (if possible, not SYSTEM - privilege separation) for scan & the GUI running as unprivileged/std user.

But that's only my point of view for a security software which, I believe, has to be better than others in this matter.
Was this reply relevant?
+1
-0

This thread has been marked as locked.