I was recently interested in allowing the guest account network access as related to a research project I was doing.
This was on a Windows Server OS.
The outcry was amazing....people freaking out and saying how insecure it is and how there just had to be a better way regardless of my needs or wants.
Apparently it's such a bad idea that under no circumstances should the question even be asked.
This seems like FUD
Looking around on the net the solution given when other people have asked around was to make a limited user account instead. Now, this seems like a worse solution.
If for whatever reason (and there are many, trying to answer for a specific reason does not help anyone, nor the community) someone is determined to have a guest account for anonymous access on a Server OS, is it not better that they use the built in guest account?
A limited account created for the exact same purpose will be used the exact same way, except that the built in guest account is already locked down to a far greater degree. Indeed, using the built in guest account with network access would seem to be more secure than creating a limited account for the same purpose.
So, why is trying to enable network access for the built in guest account considered so insecure, and why does it evoke such panic and FUD?
edit: To be clear I am referring to having the guest account initiate network connection from the machine while logged in, not using the guest account to access anything remotely