|
Focus on Microsoft
Basic question Mar 10 2005 08:56PM Roman L. Daszczyszak II (romandas gmail com) (2 replies) RE: Basic question Mar 15 2005 02:14AM Laura A. Robinson (larobins bellatlantic net) (1 replies) UF_PASSWD_NOTREQD user account flag Mar 15 2005 11:23PM Petr Merta (pmerta lynguent com) (2 replies) RE: UF_PASSWD_NOTREQD user account flag Mar 16 2005 06:43PM dave kleiman (dave isecureu com) (1 replies) RE: Basic question Mar 11 2005 10:03AM dave kleiman (dave isecureu com) (1 replies) |
|
|
Privacy Statement |
a local security policy setting that exists that says that user
accounts without passwords can only have console logon (log on
locally). Doesn't explain why you can't access the machine without a
password via SM. I believe network logon is controlled through the
user rights assignment in the local security settings (or domain if
you're networked) on a per user basis that can be set to allow/deny
remote access to the machine to specific users. It also can be
controlled through network access in the security options tab. There
is one setting that is turned on by default with simple file sharing
that says all network access is performed as user guest.
Hope that gives you some hints.
--
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 00:23:36 +0100, Petr Merta <pmerta (at) lynguent (dot) com [email concealed]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> can anybody here explain the real meaning of UF_PASSWD_NOTREQD flag of Windows
> user account? I've found bunch of user accounts in W2K domain with this flag
> set; when I've tried to perform interactive or network logon with them, it
> failed. I've found no descriptive documentation besides of vague "password
> not required" statement. My questions are:
> -- what's the actual meaning of this flag?
> -- are there some circumstances under which it is possible to logon to account
> with this flag set (without password)?
>
> Thanks for any info and/or reference.
>
> Petr
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
[ reply ]