Heterogenous archives

A big issue for historical data in banking is that they don't/can't reside within a single system.

Archives of typical bank will include dozen(s) of different archives made by different companies on different, incompatible systems. For example, see http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/big-bank-theory-chart-large.jpg as an illustration of bank mergers and acquisitions, and AFAIK that doesn't include many smaller deals. For any given account, it's 10-year history might be on some different system.

Often, when integrating such systems, a compromise is made - if bank A acquires bank B that has earlier acquired bank C, then if the acquisition of C was a few years ago, then you can skip integrating the archives of C in your online systems, keep them separate, and use them only when/if needed (and minimize that need by hefty fees). 

Since the price list and services are supposed to be equal for everyone, then no matter how your accounts originated, if 10% of archives are an expensive enough problem to integrate, then it makes financial sense to restrict access to 100% of archives older than some arbitrary threshold.

Why don't banks give access to all your transaction activity?
So I did the ultimate silly thing: I lost my domain admin password for my Server 2008 R2 box. 

Sure, I could just re-install but that's going to be a huge pain. I tried rebooting with the Windows Install DVD and replacing utilman.exe with cmd.exe, but switching to C: displayed no files.

I can still log into the machine as a regular user, though. 

And I see there's been some local privilege escalation vulnerabilities patched in the last couple months (specifically MS13-046 looks promising). And it's been a little while since I've logged in to apply MSFT patches (which oddly enough was what I was trying to log in to do).

Are there any publicly available exploits for these bugs? I don't see any in Metasploit. Or is there just a better way altogether? I full physical access to the machine, but I think BitLocker is enabled (which is why I think replacing utilman.exe failed).  
