What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a server with no
users having this user right, using terminal services. I took everyone out
of this user right, and I refreshed the policy then connected to the server
via terminal services, and proceeded to shut it down, no problem. What kind
of tool does this policy expect the remote user is going to be using to
accomplish the shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't terminal services.

Any ideas appreciated.

- wrote:
> What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a server
> with no users having this user right, using terminal services. I
> took everyone out of this user right, and I refreshed the policy
> then connected to the server via terminal services, and proceeded
> to shut it down, no problem. What kind of tool does this policy
> expect the remote user is going to be using to accomplish the
> shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't terminal services.
> Any ideas appreciated.

Who are 'they" and where are you getting this from?
IE: methinks you left out a few details.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Generally speaking a terminal services login is considered
to be a local login as there is a winstation session.
Remote login is via such as a WMI shutdown command,
which is a small network transmission.

<-> wrote in message news:%23pA821v7GHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a server with
> no users having this user right, using terminal services. I took everyone
> out of this user right, and I refreshed the policy then connected to the
> server via terminal services, and proceeded to shut it down, no problem.
> What kind of tool does this policy expect the remote user is going to be
> using to accomplish the shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't terminal services.
>
> Any ideas appreciated.
>

"Shenan Stanley" <newshelper@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uQ0y2Aw7GHA.1496@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>- wrote:
>> What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a server
>> with no users having this user right, using terminal services. I
>> took everyone out of this user right, and I refreshed the policy
>> then connected to the server via terminal services, and proceeded
>> to shut it down, no problem. What kind of tool does this policy
>> expect the remote user is going to be using to accomplish the
>> shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't terminal services.
>> Any ideas appreciated.
>
> Who are 'they" and where are you getting this from?
> IE: methinks you left out a few details.
>

I believe the "they" is MSFT when "this" user right
was given a descriptive name, which differs in XP
where it is "Force shutdown from a remote system"

Roger

> How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>

- wrote:
> What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a
> server with no users having this user right, using terminal
> services. I took everyone out of this user right, and I
> refreshed the policy then connected to the server via terminal
> services, and proceeded to shut it down, no problem. What kind
> of tool does this policy expect the remote user is going to be
> using to accomplish the shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't terminal
> services. Any ideas appreciated.

Shenan Stanley wrote:
> Who are 'they" and where are you getting this from?
> IE: methinks you left out a few details.

Roger Abell [MVP] wrote:
> I believe the "they" is MSFT when "this" user right
> was given a descriptive name, which differs in XP
> where it is "Force shutdown from a remote system"

Ah.. Thanks Roger.
I appreciate the clarification.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

I think you are refering to a GP setting and this can override someone with
local admin privs on a box from executing a remote shut down with the
"shutdown" command.

e.g.

shutdown /s /m \\jimbo /e "I am being annoying and shutting down Jimbo's
workstation"

Kind regards,

Jimbo.

<-> wrote in message news:%23pA821v7GHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a server with
> no users having this user right, using terminal services. I took everyone
> out of this user right, and I refreshed the policy then connected to the
> server via terminal services, and proceeded to shut it down, no problem.
> What kind of tool does this policy expect the remote user is going to be
> using to accomplish the shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't terminal services.
>
> Any ideas appreciated.
>

"James Saveker" <james@saveker.org> wrote in message
news:0A25BA2F-B8E2-4686-B95A-DA7C22B35B7A@microsoft.com...
>I think you are refering to a GP setting and this can override someone with
>local admin privs on a box from executing a remote shut down with the
>"shutdown" command.
>
> e.g.
>
> shutdown /s /m \\jimbo /e "I am being annoying and shutting down Jimbo's
> workstation"
>

Ummm . . . no, this user right grants that capability,
not denies it, so it certainly cannot be used to prevent
an account from using their capabilities.

> <-> wrote in message news:%23pA821v7GHA.3452@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> What do they really mean by this? I was able to shut down a server with
>> no users having this user right, using terminal services. I took
>> everyone out of this user right, and I refreshed the policy then
>> connected to the server via terminal services, and proceeded to shut it
>> down, no problem. What kind of tool does this policy expect the remote
>> user is going to be using to accomplish the shutdown? 'Cuz it sure ain't
>> terminal services.
>>
>> Any ideas appreciated.
>>
>