Localsystem account privileges in windows
-
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server? We are launching a browser through the IwebBrowser2 interface ,from an INTERACTIVE windows service (running under 'localsystem' account),and make it navigate to a url. The url in turns redirects to another page. This navigation/redirection is allowed in 2000 and XP ;but fails in 2003. Is this a result of difference in network privileges for localsystem account?
-
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server? We are launching a browser through the IwebBrowser2 interface ,from an INTERACTIVE windows service (running under 'localsystem' account),and make it navigate to a url. The url in turns redirects to another page. This navigation/redirection is allowed in 2000 and XP ;but fails in 2003. Is this a result of difference in network privileges for localsystem account?
rana74 wrote:
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server?
I would be shocked if there wasn't.
rana74 wrote:
Is this a result of difference in network privileges for localsystem account?
I would not think so.
rana74 wrote:
We are launching a browser through the IwebBrowser2 interface ,from an INTERACTIVE windows service (running under 'localsystem' account),and make it navigate to a url.
Are you sure that is the proper solution for your requirements? I am doubtful.
led mike
-
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server? We are launching a browser through the IwebBrowser2 interface ,from an INTERACTIVE windows service (running under 'localsystem' account),and make it navigate to a url. The url in turns redirects to another page. This navigation/redirection is allowed in 2000 and XP ;but fails in 2003. Is this a result of difference in network privileges for localsystem account?
rana74 wrote:
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server?
Yes. AFAIK it will remain that way for future versions as well. *edit* I thought it changed on XP as well - maybe in SP2. I can't find the whitepaper that recommends setting up a special account for services so one can better control priveledges if the built-in ones aren't sufficient. :( This one may help a bit though: The Services and Service Accounts Security Planning Guide[^]
-
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server? We are launching a browser through the IwebBrowser2 interface ,from an INTERACTIVE windows service (running under 'localsystem' account),and make it navigate to a url. The url in turns redirects to another page. This navigation/redirection is allowed in 2000 and XP ;but fails in 2003. Is this a result of difference in network privileges for localsystem account?
I don't have an answer about the redirect, but FYI this scheme won't work in Vista either because services can't display any windows on the user's desktop.
--Mike-- Visual C++ MVP :cool: LINKS~! Ericahist | PimpFish | CP SearchBar v3.0 | C++ Forum FAQ Ford, what's this fish doing in my ear?
-
Is there any difference in the privileges of the 'localsystem' account under XP,2000 and 2003 server? We are launching a browser through the IwebBrowser2 interface ,from an INTERACTIVE windows service (running under 'localsystem' account),and make it navigate to a url. The url in turns redirects to another page. This navigation/redirection is allowed in 2000 and XP ;but fails in 2003. Is this a result of difference in network privileges for localsystem account?
I have come across a heated debate of preventing interactive services in Vista too. The problem is that if we configure the service under a domain account ;it ceases to be interactive. The only way a service can be interactive is with 'localsystem' privileges.Am i wrong on this? FYI - Also,this setup works fine on Xp(Sp2) and 2000.In 2003,a normal navigatino works - but a redirection doesnt.