Beware of Ubisoft uninstallers.

[diordna]

I just tried to use the Myst V uninstaller. I accidentally gave it the directory one level below the installation directory, and it started to calmly delete everything in my Applications folder. Fortunately I was able to force quit it before it hit Utilities, but all of iLife is gone, and my install CDs don't seem to want to read. Fortunately I was able to figure out curl, so now I have the essentials back, but this is wrong on so many levels it boggles my mind. Fortunately I keep my dev tools in a different directory.

Annoying that this should happen now of all times, right before I start school.

[AnotherJake]

That blows. When will developers (especially game developers) learn that installers/uninstallers are BAD? Here's yet another case for the bad idea gone wrong file.

[diordna]

Right, and I'm still trying to wrap my head around their uninstallation "method." Get folder, wipe contents, no matter what those contents are. And since OS X includes ".." in the directory listing, well, there's really no stopping it.

[Marjock]

What did you mean by, "Fortunately I was able to figure out curl," our of curiosity?

-Mark

[OneSadCookie]

curl isn't in /Applications, so didn't get erased, unlike, say, Safari...

[diordna]

OSC is correct, as usual.

[IBethune]

Yah, sucks. Happened to me to, although I keep a seperate Games folder from Applications, so didn't actually lose anything essential...

- Iain

[ERaZer]

It happened to one of my non-computer savvy friends as well, I had to fix a lot of things on her computer after that :/ It is just awful.

[PowerMacX]

I just tried to use the Myst V uninstaller. I accidentally gave it the directory one level below the installation directory, and it started to calmly delete everything in my Applications folder. Fortunately I was able to force quit it before it hit Utilities [...]

Why are you running as an Admin? :sneaky:

[ThemsAllTook]

Why are you running as an Admin? :sneaky:
Why would you run your Mac as a non-admin?

[Duane]

so this 'uninstallers' don't delete half your applications :P

[AnotherJake]

so this 'uninstallers' don't delete half your applications :P
Sounds like Microsoft logic -- work around a stupid problem by cutting off your left hand instead of requiring the developers to fix their broken installers (by not using them in the first place of course).

[Skorche]

Sounds like Microsoft logic -- work around a stupid problem by cutting off your left hand instead of requiring the developers to fix their broken installers (by not using them in the first place of course).

What? You've got to be kidding me. Every program you run runs with your privileges. Unix can't magically protect you from every maligned program you run? That's your job to decide which programs you trust.

[AnotherJake]

What? You've got to be kidding me. Every program you run runs with your privileges. Unix can't magically protect you from every maligned program you run? That's your job to decide which programs you trust.
Uhh... I'm not sure I understand where you're coming from. Running with admin privileges or not should have absolutely nothing to do with a game installer/uninstaller trashing someone's computer. No matter what, it is the game maker's fault that their crap ruined the user's system, not the user's fault for allowing it to do so.

[backslash]

Sounds like Microsoft logic -- work around a stupid problem by cutting off your left hand instead of requiring the developers to fix their broken installers (by not using them in the first place of course).
Actually, in Windows you have to login as an admin user or most of your software won't work. What Skorche is saying is perfectly sensible - running with admin privileges is what allows Trojans to trash your system. On the other hand, running as a normal user and switching to admin user when required (the approach recommended by security experts and Unix admins) can be a pain, which is why I don't do it. Also, if the OS informed me that I have to type in my password in order to view this JPEG, I'd be a bit suspicious and wouldn't actually do it...
But for an uninstaller that I had intentionally run, I probably would have done. I don't think I will now, though.

[ERaZer]

Unix can't magically protect you from every maligned program you run? That's your job to decide which programs you trust.

The problem is I think that a lot of users would trust an uninstaller from Ubisoft...

[Hog]

What? You've got to be kidding me. Every program you run runs with your privileges. Unix can't magically protect you from every maligned program you run? That's your job to decide which programs you trust.

uninstalling stuff usually requires privileges to write to where you want to erase stuff from. how a game would require an un/installer which writes to the applications folder however i have no idea.

[Skorche]

True enough that the uninstaller would have to be authenticated anyway, but it doesn't make it a Microsoft like security measure. That was my main point.

[AnotherJake]

True enough that the uninstaller would have to be authenticated anyway, but it doesn't make it a Microsoft like security measure. That was my main point.
Wuh? :blink:

Now I'm thoroughly confused. You must've misread my post or something, because I wasn't really talking about a "Microsoft like security measure" [edit: well maybe I was... fsuck, I really just don't understand why I'm being yelled at for this] (I was referring to the way they like to fix problems, although I realize this discussion is somewhat about security, so I can see how that could be misconstrued) . My point was that people shouldn't have to live in fear by running admin non-stop and being paranoid all the time just because some stupid game company pissed in the tea. From my experience, Microsoft has a tendency to do stupid things like telling millions of users to clamp down all of their security measures instead of telling one company to fix its broken installer which was causing the problem to begin with. (As I said earlier: "work around a stupid problem by cutting off your left hand instead of requiring the developers to fix their broken installers") They shouldn't even be using installers in the first place! I can't believe anyone would actually be offended that I said that...

[Skorche]

Let me straighten this out a bit more. I agree that installers are lame, and that they shouldn't make them. I realize that you are going to have to authenticate to run the installer/uninstaller. And I agree that a bug in a program that you authenticated to run is downright awful.

The reason that you should clamp down on security is to prevent malicious programs from doing harm that you didn't know were being run, possibly disguised as a program that you did want to run, etc. If say, an image viewer executable has been compromised, and wants to delete privileged locations on your hard drive, it would be able to do it if you were running it as an admin. On Unixes, admins are usually only semi-omnipotent, which is good because you still have to authenticate for anything fatally damaging to happen, but you still have write access to places outside of your home folder.

[Duane]

Well, it seems stupid to run as an admin. Mac applications are built so that everyone, including unprivileged users, can run them. Why allow programs unrestricted access to your core files if you don't have to? You can always authenticate with your admin account if you want to install something....

[AnotherJake]

Let me straighten this out a bit more. I agree that installers are lame, and that they shouldn't make them. I realize that you are going to have to authenticate to run the installer/uninstaller. And I agree that a bug in a program that you authenticated to run is downright awful.

The reason that you should clamp down on security is to prevent malicious programs from doing harm that you didn't know were being run, possibly disguised as a program that you did want to run, etc. If say, an image viewer executable has been compromised, and wants to delete privileged locations on your hard drive, it would be able to do it if you were running it as an admin. On Unixes, admins are usually only semi-omnipotent, which is good because you still have to authenticate for anything fatally damaging to happen, but you still have write access to places outside of your home folder.

How many times have you had a malicious program on your Mac?

I know, I know, that's not the point. But isn't it? I mean, why lock the front door if there aren't any burglars around? Just so that you are fully prepared for the day that the first burglar moves into town? To me that is paranoia, which is fundamentally in opposition to the way I normally think. Some would argue it is not paranoia, but preparedness instead, but I haven't found a demonstrably sound reason not to run as admin on OS X for all these years, and I see no reason to start now. Call me fearless or call me stupid, but that's the way I like it right now until things change.

[Hog]

Why allow programs unrestricted access to your core files if you don't have to?...

the stuff in the applications folder isn't that important compared to your personal and private documents (which are usually always accessible).

[PowerMacX]

the stuff in the applications folder isn't that important compared to your personal and private documents (which are usually always accessible).

True, but if I lose part of the system (or in this case, the default apps) I lose functionality (ie: my machine turns into an expensive brick until I can reinstall them, and losing a browser could be a bigger trouble for most people unfamiliar with command line tools). Also, most people who do backup, backup files, not apps.

With all that said, yes, I do run as an admin :p , but I mess with the system on a daily basis and have my install discs handy ;)