Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software
From: Marilyne (Marilyne_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 02/26/05
- Next message: Sidney: "Re: Beta anti spyware"
- Previous message: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- In reply to: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- Next in thread: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- Reply: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:57:03 -0800
Thank you!
I did download both filemon and regmon. I found several references to the
software. I copied the references; however, when I tried to run the software
to get the errors, I could not run it in the user login because they didn't
have the security rights. I can run the software as administrator on the
same machine but my question is how to I find the registry errors that came
up for that software when it was in user mode.
I was confused enough to hire someone to come in and try to decifer it for
me; however, he didn't seem to know what he was looking for either. I will
complain to the manufacturer because this is a major vendor and the software
is very expensive; however, the company didn't have any problems running it
on Windows 98.
Can you suggest some tricks I can use with regmon or filemon?
"Roger Abell" wrote:
> The message that you see when trying to run those applications
> as a limited user, to effect, "the software has not been installed
> correctly" is a correct message. In fact, the software is not
> capable of installing itself correctly.
> There are quite a few companies that still have not lifted their
> eyes above the DOS/Win9x days. You need to not just ask for
> their support but to let them know that they have sold you flawed
> software that does not respect the requirements of software that
> is designed for Windows (the logo specification).
> You voice, added to that of others, is the only thing that will
> push these vendors into creating/selling "modern" software.
>
> OK, so what else can you do besides telling them that the next
> purchase is guided by the made for Windows logo being on the
> software?
>
> The one route you explored, making the users' domain accounts
> members of the machine local Administrators group is one way,
> but consider it a last resort. Also, you may need to look for some
> Restricted Group definitions in the GPOs in AD judging from
> what you have said.
>
> Many such illbehaved software can be cured by granting the
> Users group Modify permissions on the directory to which the
> software installed, like c:\program files\vendorapplication
> If that is insufficent then the application when running may be
> trying to create temporary files somewhere else where the
> Users group does not (and should not) have permission to do
> so. The other major reason for failure is that the application
> is trying to write into the registry, likely somewhere like
> HKLM\Software\Vendorname\Applicationname, a location
> to which limited user do not and should not have write granted.
> So, one can try granting this in the registry to just that vendor's
> keys for the application, but if it does not help remove the grant.
> There are two tools , fileman and regmon, thay you may get
> at www.sysinternals.com that are a great help in locating where
> an application is trying to write and being denied. To use these,
> log in as an admin, start the apps and configure the capture filters
> to watch the limited account you will use to run the application.
> Then, start the capture and use runas to start the application as
> that limited user. As soon as the application has failed, stop
> the capture and examine it for the failures indicating where you
> could try granting Users group higher permissions.
>
> That said, there are some software that just plain cannot be
> made to work. It is too DOSish. However, if the application
> did work for a non-admin in Windows 2000 then the above
> will likely resolve your problems.
>
> --
> Roger Abell
> Microsoft MVP (Windows Security)
> MCSE (W2k3,W2k,Nt4) MCDBA
> "Marilyne" <Marilyne@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:7015D463-CEC6-4EE5-89E5-835934C810C1@microsoft.com...
> > I am managing a network using 16 workstations sharing files on a Windows
> 2003
> > server. The users do not have rights to install programs. All users have
> > Office 2003; however, each workstation has additional software that is
> > specific to their business specialty. There is only one software package
> > running off the server. My problem is when I install some software
> packages
> > they do not work for the user using standard user rights.
> >
> > I have consulted other network techs regarding the problem and followed
> > various suggestions none of these ideas worked. It appears the server is
> > over-riding something in the software registry. Therefore the software
> will
> > not initiate once the user has standard user rights to the machine. If I
> get
> > an error it usually says the software was not installed properly. Once I
> > change the users rights to "Administrator" the software works.
> >
> > I've tried changing the machine user rights so that the user has
> > administrative rights to his/her machine but as soon as they login with
> their
> > standard user login created for the domain, the server over rides the
> rights
> > and the software will not work.
> >
> > There are three software packages that are giving me this conflict. One
> is
> > an engineering software, one is a form software and the other is a
> software
> > that initiates the vinyl cutter. I have called the software vendors and
> they
> > give me no technical advice. They don't know what would cause this
> conflict.
> > I am looking forward to hearing some good advice.
> >
> > It has been suggested to me that I give the user administrative rights and
> > give up. This means the user has access to payroll and account records
> the
> > administration does not want public. If there is a way to give the users
> > administrative rights and limit their access to specific folders. I am
> > willing to make that adjustment.
> > --
> > Marilyne
>
>
>
- Next message: Sidney: "Re: Beta anti spyware"
- Previous message: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- In reply to: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- Next in thread: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- Reply: Roger Abell: "Re: Windows 2003 Users vs Software"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|