Michael Froomkin installs SP2 (partially on the strength of my say-so), and says, So Far, So-So.
The results are mixed. The laptop seems a little slower, especially on boot up. And one other change I made at the same time is not working out at all well. Having read all this tech advice about XP, I saw that there was a strong consensus that I sholuldn’t ordinarily be logged in as an “admistrator” but should be operating as a “limited” account to prevent anything untword taking over my PC.
Well, OK, I’m a very obedient guy when it comes to computer security (unlike most of the rest of my life), so I create a “root” account, make it an administrator and change my ususal account to “limited” status. But now when I try to turn off the computer, both Explorer and the “Power Meter” hang. This doesn’t seem to happen when I am running solely as “root.” All I can say is … harumph.
As a general rule, I recommend making one change at a time when reconfiguring a system. That makes it easier to identify the source of a problem.
In this case, the problem is running as a limited user, which is a fabulous idea in theory but, unfortunately, problematic in practice with Windows XP. Linux boxes manage the concept of segregating root vs. user well. Windows currently does not. If all you use is Office and other modern programs installed using the latest version of the Windows Installer, then you’ll do just fine. But I suspect that Prof. Froomkin has one or more programs on his computer that don’t play by the rules. (I’ve made my feelings on the subject known in this post.)
So, bottom line, run as an Admin under Windows XP and concentrate your security efforts elsewhere.
For some excellent (albeit somewhat dense) reading on this subject, see this article by Michael Howard and this one by Dana Epp, both of whom are as authoritative as you can get on the subject.
Update: In a follow-up comment, Hellsbellboy points out Tim Anderson’s excellent post on the subject (you can read it here). Tim does argue that most Windows users should try to run with limited rights. However, his main point (I think – it’s a pretty opaque post!) is that Microsoft’s developers should be forced to run with limited rights so that they can learn about what it means to run in this mode and code accordingly.
Prof. Froomkin also wonders why Microsoft didn’t fix this in SP2. The problem is that this is a basic part of the architecture of Windows, and it’s based on the way that applications interact with the OS. If all your applications follow the rules, then you can indeed run using a limited account. But there are way too many non-compliant applications out there, and the operating system doesn’t have a graceful way to prevent them from assuming that you’re running as an administrator.
This change in architecture is a key part of the design for the next version of Windows, code-named Longhorn. And I repeat that you can run with a limited account if you are willing to get rid of applications that don’t play be the rules. In fact, doing so will probably make your system more reliable and secure, at the cost of losing access to a program or two. It shouldn’t be that difficult, but it is.
