> The program continues to run with nobody logged on, and continues to 
> execute any instructions it has been given. However, to give it 
> instructions, you have to log on, and it records the username of the 
> person giving the instructions. If we had a single logon, there would be 
> no record of who issued those instructions.

Just set it up so the program that you give commands to cannot be started as 
the lab user, and then do "Run As" the real user when you need to issue 
commands...

BTW I thought you could switch users on XP and Vista without the first 
user's programs being shut down.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> The program continues to run with nobody logged on, and continues to 
>> execute any instructions it has been given. However, to give it 
>> instructions, you have to log on, and it records the username of the 
>> person giving the instructions. If we had a single logon, there would 
>> be no record of who issued those instructions.
> 
> Just set it up so the program that you give commands to cannot be 
> started as the lab user, and then do "Run As" the real user when you 
> need to issue commands...

That could work, I guess.

> BTW I thought you could switch users on XP and Vista without the first 
> user's programs being shut down.

Uh... yeah, possibly.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Then the *other* piece of software running on the computer wouldn't be 
> able to log audit events under the correct username.

You do know you can have two people logged on at the same time, yes?

Start program one, lock the screen, log in as second user, start program 
two, lock the screen.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> You do know you can have two people logged on at the same time, yes?

Actually, that might be slightly harder with AD. You might have to log in 
remotely to have multiple accounts logged in at once.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> BTW I thought you could switch users on XP and Vista without the first
> user's programs being shut down.

In Windows XP, you cannot "switch users" like that if the computer is part
of a Windows domain. But it is supported since Vista.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> In Windows XP, you cannot "switch users" like that if the computer is part
> of a Windows domain. 

Is that true even if you log in remotely with RDP? I know we did that with 
Win2000, so I find it hard to believe XP can't?

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

>> In Windows XP, you cannot "switch users" like that if the computer is 
>> part
>> of a Windows domain. 
> 
> Is that true even if you log in remotely with RDP? I know we did that 
> with Win2000, so I find it hard to believe XP can't?

Windows XP Professional supports 1 user logging in via RDP (but only if 
nobody is logged in remotely). Windows 2003 Server supports multiple RDP 
sessions, but Windows XP supports only one at a time. As in, before 
anybody else can connect, you must disconnect (i.e., log out).

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>>> In Windows XP, you cannot "switch users" like that if the computer is 
>>> part
>>> of a Windows domain. 
>>
>> Is that true even if you log in remotely with RDP? I know we did that 
>> with Win2000, so I find it hard to believe XP can't?
> 
> Windows XP Professional supports 1 user logging in via RDP (but only if 
> nobody is logged in remotely). Windows 2003 Server supports multiple RDP 
> sessions, but Windows XP supports only one at a time. As in, before 
> anybody else can connect, you must disconnect (i.e., log out).

Yes. Distinguish "logged in" from "connected". Just like you can only 
"switch users" on XP Pro by locking the screen, you can have multiple 
programs running concurrently under multiple user accounts by logging in 
remotely under different names and disconncting rather than logging out.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message

>> Windows XP Professional supports 1 user logging in via RDP (but only 
>> if nobody is logged in remotely). Windows 2003 Server supports 
>> multiple RDP sessions, but Windows XP supports only one at a time. As 
>> in, before anybody else can connect, you must disconnect (i.e., log out).
> 
> Yes. Distinguish "logged in" from "connected". Just like you can only 
> "switch users" on XP Pro by locking the screen, you can have multiple 
> programs running concurrently under multiple user accounts by logging in 
> remotely under different names and disconncting rather than logging out.

It's an interesting theory. I don't think it works like that, but I 
don't have time to try right now.

(Of course, by default, only an administrator can log in via RDP in the 
first place...)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> It's an interesting theory. I don't think it works like that, but I 
> don't have time to try right now.

I can guarantee it works that way without AD.

> (Of course, by default, only an administrator can log in via RDP in the 
> first place...)

That's trivial to fix.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message