> The biggest issue here is that although it's technically easy to fix
> this problem (just have UAC issue an alert when somebody's messing with
> the system settings), it involves doing more of what end users dislike
> most about UAC (it issuing alerts to Joe Sixpack all the time when he
> does so
>I believe I stated *up front* that it doesn't secure against an active MITM
attack. Once ettercap presents a *different* >certificate than the one you
were expecting, the victim can at least potentially notice (the same way
that OpenSSH complains >if it discovers that a host key is different).
