JWS with restricted windows user accounts

[Lionel van den Berg]

Hi all,

I manage a Java app that I've released using JWS. Some of my users work
in networks where they use windows and are not allowed to install
anything.

I'm not sure if JWS is affected by these restrictions and I have
unfortunately not been able to find someone to do some tests and let me
know.

I know for sure that on my PC I can install my app on a restricted
account under XP but I don't think this is the same thing.

I have tried search the JWS documentation and windows documentation but
have come up with nothing.

Does anyone know what the behavior is in such cases?

Thanks

Lionel.

 

[Lionel van den Berg]

Hi all,

I manage a Java app that I've released using JWS.

It may be relevant that it is a signed app.

 

[Roedy Green]

I manage a Java app that I've released using JWS. Some of my users work
in networks where they use windows and are not allowed to install
anything.

I did an experiment for you. On Vista Home Premium I set up an
account without Administrator privilege. I used the Opera browser and
it would happily run signed JWS apps. I discovered though that the
ability to set the clock was inhibited.

Since there are no EXE files involved, I guess Windows does not count
what JWS does as installing.

 

[Lionel van den Berg]

A Java webstart application is downloaded into the JRE cache (you can
see this in the Java control panel). This is per user, like a browser
cache.

As I explained to one interested admin user who has assumed it won't
work. However, you will also note that the application will show up in
the "add/remove applications" tool in the windows control panel. Can this
occur even for the most restricted user?

Hope this helps.

Certainly useful .

You can your application by making a different user on
your machine, I supose.

hmmm, that make not sense much. .

 

[Lionel van den Berg]

I did an experiment for you. On Vista Home Premium I set up an account
without Administrator privilege. I used the Opera browser and it would
happily run signed JWS apps. I discovered though that the ability to
set the clock was inhibited.

Thanks, so on my XP box it works, and on your vista box it works.
However, do these guys in big organisations have windows accounts that
are more restrictive than our restrictive/non-user accounts?

Perhaps you care to test my application www.tciworks.info. I'm sure you
won't know what to do with it .

Maybe this is more a windows question.

Thanks

Lionel.

 

[Lionel van den Berg]

Hm, I hadn't noticed this. You can also see and uninstall it through the
"webstart application viewer" (javaws -viewer).

I'm going with "it should work", if a user can browse the 'net, he
should be able to use Java webstart.

My hunch is that you are right. Logically it makes sense and I thought
this to be the case but not sure if I have the tools to test.

Yes, that sentence no verb (DOH!). I meant *test* it on your own
machine.

Yeah, I've setup a test account for that purpose. I'm just not sure if my
windows XP version of "Restricted User" is the same as what these large
government organisations use. It's looking like it will be ok, I will
just have to get the one user I have who wants to use it to just try it
out and see how it goes. So far they don't answer any of my questions .

Lionel.

 

[Andrew Thompson]

It may be relevant that it is a signed app.

This kind of ability is usually configured in
the 'Java Control Panel' (or whatever Sun is
calling it this instant). For example, the JCP
might be configured to allow sandboxed apps.
(which might then obtain files using the JNLP
API's FileOpenService) but automatically /reject/
trusted apps.

But that is not how the plug-in is configured by
default, and would require special set-up.

Having said that, there have been bugs that
(for example) restricted fully signed and trusted
apps. from accessing files outside a narrow set
of directories considered 'safe' by the OS (the
particular case I am thinking of involved applets
and JWS apps. that were launched using IE on Vista).

I proposed a solution for that bug, but never got
any testing results back. (I don't run Vista).