I was involved in the following thread: Jeff Johnson wrote: > Lie Ryan wrote: >> Jeff Johnson wrote: >>> I have an application that uses something that auto updates but it may not be the same process as yours. I have a "stub" executable that checks a network location for a different copy of the "real" executable. If one exists, it copies the exe to the application folder and executes it. My solution for Vista - which works very well - is to put my application in a folder C:\users\public\applications\myapplication. >>> >>> This way there is no need for raised privileges. >>> >> >> The only problem with installing in public folder that is it allows non-privileged (read: any) user to modify the program; which might be unwanted for some apps. > > My programs are exe's and not editable. >
Even if it's an .exe, malicious users could overwrite your program with a malicious executable. In some environment this could be considered a security issue. <end of thread> A lot of us have been putting our apps in the users\public folder with great success. Although I have never had anyone overwrite my exe with malicious code, I suppose it could be done and his point should be considered. I am interested in your opinions of this subject. Is putting apps in \users\public a security risk? -- Jeff Jeff Johnson [email protected] SanDC, Inc. 623-582-0323 Fax 623-869-0675 _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
