benannett Posted March 11, 2007 Posted March 11, 2007 I am the ICT Coord for a Special Needs school and am very pleased indeed to discover this site. We have one remote site that has a number of stand-alone pcs - which I am trying to configure in such a way as to limit the damage that students can do. Limited accounts in XP merely stop users from installing or uninstalling programs. However, we have problems with students deleting whole portions of the C-drive. I would like to set up the machines with a "super-limited" account. Ideally they would not be able to see the C-drive and they would not be able to change the desktop picture or any of the settings. Does anyone have any suggestions? Can I use gpedit.msc to achieve these results? Regards
GrumbleDook Posted March 11, 2007 Posted March 11, 2007 I would recommend you look at something like Deep Freeze to help with this. This would mean that any deletions that happen will be undone on next reboot. Microsoft also have Microsoft Shared Computer Toolkit that is available for things like this too ... There are other 3rd party tools to that vary in expense but Deep Freeze seems to be the most common.
Norphy Posted March 11, 2007 Posted March 11, 2007 Should be able to. The Microsoft Shared Computer Toolkit should also help
benannett Posted March 11, 2007 Author Posted March 11, 2007 Microsoft Shared Computer Toolkit looks like a useful - and free - tool. Defo worth a try. Thanks!
ITWombat Posted March 11, 2007 Posted March 11, 2007 We have one remote site that has a number of stand-alone pcs - which I am trying to configure in such a way as to limit the damage that students can do. Limited accounts in XP merely stop users from installing or uninstalling programs. However, we have problems with students deleting whole portions of the C-drive. Eh? If your are using NTFS partitions this shouldn't be possible unless students have been deliberatively given elevated permissions to common folders i.e. for Windows 98 style applications. If the partitions are NTFS were they converted from FAT/FAT32? If so common folders permissions may need to be tied down again as they inherit the looser seettings of FAT.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now