Re: Allowing Users to Increase Scheduling Priority
From: Roger Abell [MVP] (mvpNoSpam_at_asu.edu)
Date: 11/22/05
- Next message: Roger Abell [MVP]: "Re: ipsec to block ip range"
- Previous message: Roger Abell [MVP]: "Re: Why Are List Folder / Read Data Combined?"
- In reply to: Will: "Allowing Users to Increase Scheduling Priority"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:23:53 -0700
It is probably better to look at this in the reverse.
You have error messages you would rather not see, which is
understandable. To get rid of these you apparently could grant
this right. But then what? Well, it is not know what is trying to
get recognized as having this right or whether it would actually
then use it. If it does use it it is not know what it is or what it
would do with it. But, it is known that using this adjusts the
scheduler's parsing out of execution quanta between processes,
and it is known that raising the priority of processes can (and
at some point will) lead to starvation of other processes.
So, to answer you question, given the unknowns, the question
comes down to whether you are willing to let users have
unknown processes that might starve other things from
getting any cpu cycles or that might destabalize the system.
"Will" <DELETE_westes@earthbroadcast.com> wrote in message
news:ZpGdnTxsb-rfTufenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> Aside from possible denial of service attacks, is there a reason that we
> should not allow Users to have the Increase Scheduling Priority user
> rights
> assignment in group policy? I'm seeing a large number of security audit
> messages for users for the SeIncreaseBasePriorityPrivilege, which is
> probably associated with something like a screensaver. These always seem
> to accumulate in groups of eight or more, as some process tries repeatedly
> to exercise this privilege. I would really rather not deal with this as
> an
> error, unless there is a really good reason for it.
>
> --
> Will
>
>
- Next message: Roger Abell [MVP]: "Re: ipsec to block ip range"
- Previous message: Roger Abell [MVP]: "Re: Why Are List Folder / Read Data Combined?"
- In reply to: Will: "Allowing Users to Increase Scheduling Priority"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|