1996-10-05 - RE: WINDOWS NT ????

Header Data

From: John Fricker <jfricker@vertexgroup.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: a1061fac9d8796616d880f84a96293c09ffb20e982107aa955e2b1169f55cf9f
Message ID: <19961005145216660.AAA122@dev.vertexgroup.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-05 17:06:56 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 01:06:56 +0800

Raw message

From: John Fricker <jfricker@vertexgroup.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 01:06:56 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: RE: WINDOWS NT ????
Message-ID: <19961005145216660.AAA122@dev.vertexgroup.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>Adamsc (Adamsc@io-online.com) said something about Re: WINDOWS NT ???? on or about 10/5/96 1:00 AM

>
>Microsoft claims C2 or higher for NT and deserves any ragging they get if
>it's not.   Ditto for any other vendor who claims one thing and sells
>another.

You ought to read about C2. 

DIdn't Steve Martin say something like "criticize things you don't know about".

>BTW:  Bizarre NT Quirk #15413 -  The Administrator account does not have
>access to the entire disk.  You got it - if you're the administrator you
>still cannot look into certain directories belonging to another user - even
>if you've given all access privileges to the Admin account.  Got a few
>chuckles at work.
>

It's not rocket science to defeat this. The administrator is prevented from casually peering into user owned directories but any administrator worth a nickle can tap tap click and have access to any directory. 








Thread