Slashdot Mirror
Permanently Changing Windows XP Security Settings?
pnutjam asks: "I have googled and perused several publications seeking an answer but I find no mention of this problem anywhere. I am running applications not designed for a multi-user environment on Windows XP. To allow standard users to run these applications I've modified permissions on files, folders, and registry keys. Whenever a computer with the modifications is rebooted, the permissions revert to their previous settings. It doesn't happen when the users log off, only when the computers are rebooted." When adjusting Windows XP to support such applications, how do you make permission changes so that they survive through a reboot?
Methinks this question would be better asked on a Windows-XX specific site. Here, you're likely to get bombarded with flames.....
Slashdot, News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
Not all computer "nerds" run linux/bsd/etc and probably don't want to. Flame me away, but this is a technical news forum with a slant against anything microsoft/anti-gpl etc.
People grow up and just comment if you can help. I'm not a microsoft fanboy, but this ignorance, aggression and non-acceptance is really counter productive for the "community" you people aspire to have in life.
Call Microsoft techn support.
Why's this funny? He's got a problem with software that cost a great deal of money, why the hell SHOULDN'T he call tech support? Seems like the first thing he should have done...
I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
Finally, I agree with previous posters- an Open Source website is no place to ask random support questions for a closed source OS. /. is a geek news site. Not a F/OSS site.
And we have people who check stories for appropriateness for the site. They're called editors, and they all work with (or are) the folks who originally made the site.
Or even something as simple as whether or not he un-checked "Allow inheritable permissions from parent to propogate to this object". I've found that XP will seem to let the permissions get changed without un-checking this box, but on re-boot the permissions re-propogate
Tried it both ways. I like OSS as much as anybody on slashdot, right now, MS is what feeds the kids.
Cheap storage VM.
Upon reading the original question, I doubt that this information is really necessary. He poses a pretty generic scenario and no doubt would like to know how to solve the problem for as large a class of apps as possible.
Would you actually be capable of answering his question if you had this information, or are you just posing a position to be 'helpful' to those that really can?