On 9/8/07, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 09:45:21AM -0500, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > On 9/8/07, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
> > > A lack of a sense of control is simply one more barrier to potential
> > > switchers. Make sense?
> >
> > But by starting postgresql under an administrative account, the user
> > would, in effect, be giving up that control to PostgreSQL to simply do
> > as it pleased with the machine.
> >
> > The real problem here is the common perception in Windows user's minds
> > that running as an admin account is acceptable. It's not. It's
> > dangerous. If your friend was following the basic tenant of not
> > running as an admin all the time, there would be no problem. He, and
> > many other windows users, have a bad habit to unlearn. Making
> > PostgreSQL part of the problem is not the solution.
>
> I agree. And my recommendation for _next_ time he reinstalls his
> windows/ sets up his machine, will be to arrange to live in a
> non-privileged account. I don't know when that will be.
>
> In the meantimem, is there any option to allow pg to run in a privileged
> account on windows?
Your friend has the following choices in the matter. He can stop
running as an administrator and then run postgresql from his account,
or he can install postgresql as a service, which really isn't a huge
inconvience / use of resources or he can hack the windows code to let
pgsql run in an unsupported and unsafe manner.
Everyone here is willing to help you figure out the first two. The
last one no one wants to mess with because the next thing we'll here
is how postgresql doesn't care about security / is a back door to
windows.