Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. General Programming
  3. Windows API
  4. Launching a non-elevated process from an elevated one...

Launching a non-elevated process from an elevated one...

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Windows API
comsecurityperformancequestion
1 Posts 1 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • M Offline
    M Offline
    Mike_V
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Is it just me, or is there really no good way to launch a non-elevated process from an elevated one? First I read about the Task Scheduler[^] approach, and now about the Remote Code Injection[^] method. (I'm not trying to attack the author here; the articles themselves are well-written but the method is hackish and unreliable.) Vista obviously can launch a program using whatever permissions it wants. (Proof: There exists a first non-elevated program on the system) And launching a program as a non-elevated user seems to be just a matter of messing with the process's security descriptors, etc. So why are the only methods (that I've seen) so hack-ish? The Task Scheduler approach relies on the Task Scheduler service being started. If it's disabled, you're out of luck, your program crashes, etc. A Bad Thing. The remote code injection approach relies on message hooks being injected into other processes. While that is unlikely to change due to the massive amount of compatability problems that woud ensue, it still could. Today's processors are fast enough where the performance impact of a context switch would not be as terrible as it was in 1994. It would be interesting if Raymond Chen blogged about this. It's not in his area of expertise, but those who read his blog know he'd have some strong words to say about these approaches... Anyone know? Michael

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes


    • Login

    • Don't have an account? Register

    • Login or register to search.
    • First post
      Last post
    0
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • World
    • Users
    • Groups