What's the first question you ask yourself when you see a user that is doing something that could have been prevented with lockdown?
For me it is, what kind of "additional features" will the installed programs cary? What kind of malware will I have to remove from the machine? Or is this program leaking out data through the web/mail interface.
Locking out users is not done just out of sheer fun. Fixing machines broken my 3rd party programs does have a cost. Sadly most of the time I have to deal with this kind of programs, it will be because the user has installed some porn shit. Very, very few programs would actually increase creativity on the user's behalf.
Next you will be telling us that the slaves were really happier before the Civil War.
Probably not, but who the fuck is talking about the slaves here? You were questioned if you ever lived under any of the regimes you despised or through a war you seem so eager to cast on other people's country.
It's not like anyone would really want to risk their lives for freedom - right? People risk their lifes for freedom. True revolutions are made by the people, not by some foreign invading army. Take a look at the Perestroika, Rumanina or Yugoslavian revolution. Compare them to current situation in Bosnia or Afghanistan.
The sooner the Americans stop seeing themselves as world police, the sooner the rest of the world will start to get along with you. Grow up, wise up, and by Pete's sake, get the crazy cowboy out of the White House.
Living your life under Stalin, Kim of North Korea, Castro, Saddam Hussein is worse than war Not that I support any of this people; but how would you know about this? Have you ever lived under any of this regimes? Have you ever had to face the crudeness of a war?
ISO 9000 does not specify backups separated by more than xxxx meters. They only ask that your quality registries are filed, retrivable and do not degrade over the course of time. It is the organization setting up their quality systems that define how and where are these registries going to be stored (and if necesary backed up).
Of course, if you keep these registries on IT infrastructure, the smart thing to do would be to back them up off site.
Dont worry about it... my users do this too, I guess I could conclude that stupidity is universal.
There is one option that you could consider. Enabling roaming profiles. Profiles not only save their windows themes, but also the content of "My Documents" to the server every time the users log out.
Bounces them / doesn't accept them. The end result to the author of the denied message will still look the same, except maybe one will be delayed for a couple of hours.
I've set up exim to ignore all incoming SMTP calls from dsl hosts (*.dsl.*) and also to block hosts without proper reverse-DNS.
Good for you, I hope you also told your users that you might be bouncing 70% (according to AOL figures) of legitimate email, just because the sender's postmaster chose not to follow your unpublished standard. If you didn't, then by all means start reherseaing excuses to tell your users (and some of them do get angry) regarding their bounced mail.
Whenever I get bounces from sys admins such as yourself I basically fax the original message, bounce notice, along a note suggesting the end user to change their ISP.
Back in the days where dedicated high speed Internet access was for the rich, a client of us was testing a web based data capture form. The contractor developing the web based had blundered the designed (or maybe had miscalculated the times required to fetch data from DBMS) and to cover up their tracks they told our customer that the new system would require "broadband access" to the Internet.
No problem, when the sales department came to me, I told them that according to V.35 our connection to the Internet was an effective broadband type and that they could put that into our proposal. Nobody in the other end complained, the new system (along with the contractor) eventally got sacked and we ended up burning CDs and transfering them to our client like we always had.
If your father nags you because of your grades, use of dangerous drugs or driving under the influence of alcohol, I don't posibly see how he is imposing on you his life model.
Just go ahead and try learning based on trail and error on any of the before mentioned subjects.
And, thus, the child's experience might be limited to the parent's own experience.
Come on now, are you trying to tell us that you got more experience in life than your father can posibly have? You can probably show your father a lot of things, but you will never show him how to make babies.
The school's perception of the truth isn't always correct or even needed. I agree with the "correct" part, but definetly not with the "needed". Your folks are some way or another paying for school. They are entitled to a report from it. You don't like the rules, then move out of your house and try giving a shot to real life. You will find that not every thing there is to learn about life you can learn on your own. Further more, you will find that society will only give you access to certain oportunities based on your academic history.
Trouble with ditching IE even to favor Mozilla/Opera/Netscape is the fact that some banks/sites favor IE and won't support Netscape/Mozilla. Some sites won't even function properly with Netscape/Mozilla/Opera.
The last thing I want is the folks I support complaining they can't see a page. I just really hate user support. I hate it, I hate it.
1. A copy of a decent AV. Norton/Mcafee basically suck with its new business model, I am sick and tired of cleaning up machines with expired AVs. The people from Grisoft make free nonexpiring AVs for noncomercial use.
2. Lavasoft Adaware is also a vital component. So much malware is responsible for irresponsive/crashy machines, I could set a business just selling copies of this and recovering machines.
3. The long list of SPs and QFs for Win98 and IE. Actually I am begining to ponder wether to start ditching IE and OE on the new machines I see in favor of Netscape.
No, no... he meant invasion. Like the one in Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Panama, Chile (oh, just to name a few). Afterwards, just set up a puppet (think about the french, polish, austrian post-german-invasion governments since you seem to be well versed in WWII). Shall the puppet become hostile, shake and renew the process. Why maintain a fully productive army in an occupied country while it could be used to "liberate" other "oppressed" nations?
I live in Mexico City, and get my connection to Internet thourgh DSL. Unlike the US, the POTs infrastucture is not open to any ISP, so either you sign up with the national telephone company, or you are stuck with dail up. Of course, as it usually turns out to be in this kind of scenario, the clueless designers in the telephone company have lumped residential (dynamic IP) with business (fixed IP) DSL (and yes, I have notified them about this), thus leaving many business in the dark when it comes to bounces. My point is, sometimes you just do not have an option. Choosing to bounce just because the sender can't invest on a dedicated link is rather snobistic.
I'm not convinced that it's unfair to say that to a business DSL customer either, although I understand how they would like to be able to send mail directly instead of smarthosting through their provider. I am sorry, but you are nobody to tell other admins how to run their system. If you want to block business DSLs, then start rehersing excuses to tell your users when they complain that legit business mail is being blocked by you. Sending mail through many ISPs SMTP servers is usually a nightmare. In my case, they impose strange restrictions on the message return address and attachment max sizes. Whenever I get a bounce suggesting that I am on DSL, I just fax the message to the user along with the bounce and a note suggesting him to change ISPs.
only people using NT are businesses that are reluctant or unable to upgrade. Je, I remember too when I was a student and thought that to upgrade software all you needed was to buy the thing and then run a wizard.
Unfortunately, this is not the case for most systems. Upgrading takes much time and puts strain on IT staff to get the monster running on schedule. Last time I upgraded the CEO of the company walked in on me during a sunday to see if the systems would be ready to run on Monday. Must I say more?
Please let me know what, from a business point of view, a mainframe can't do that a Solaris (or *laughs sarcastically* a Windows) box can? Mainframes are in a different league, when it comes to reliablity, scalability and raw transaction power. Take a look at this article.
While the poster might laugh it up, there are millions of bucks invested in COBOL code, and none of the owners are eager to hear on trashing their systems and rewritting things up.
I am however puzzled over one simple fact; can it really be legal in the USofA (where I presume this is happening) to sell such a device? Over here (Norway for those who don't get the clue from my nick) it would be quite illegal to sell something which is intended to allow the (l)user to break the law.
It probably ain't; this would be a legitimate target of the DMCA, but since the cable operators are getting rich with this device, I am certian they are not considering taking this affair to court.
Je... they probably are secretly financing the guy who developed this con
There is nothing complex about the truth. You funded this man and now that he does not fit in your political agenda, you want him out. You did the same in Panama and in Chile. No theories involved here, just the facts.
But forget about the funding, the double morale of the US lies in the fact that you sold, assisted and even ignored his use of WMD during the 80s. Why didn't you just sold him conventional weapons back then? Or did your government thought he was just going to assemble a biology research lab?
How do you expect any support from the world when you have been directly involved in the creation and empowerment of this madman? Shouldn't the world be imposing sanctions on the US for providing him with the means for doing such a thing?
And since you are turning on France for making money out of Iraq, why don't you take your terrrorism problems up with Saudi Arabia? Or is it he fact the Saudi Arabia provides you with your much needed oil has to do anything with this? After all, Saudi Arabia has been a much more involved country when it comes to financing and supporting terrorism than Iraq.
I believe a US-led war on Iraq is entirely justified Is this because of all the technology/weapons of mass destruction the US helped him aquire? Maybe Bush should take this up with his daddy and leave the world alone. Why doesn't the US present this as the much seeked proof of WMD in Iraq?
After one madman bent on your destruction is *not* attacked, and then kills thousands of innocent Americans, it is perfectly justified to seek out other madmen bent on your destruction. You did attack Al-Qaeda and Ossama Bin Ladden. It was your excuse for bombing Afghanistan. Thousands died in your showoff, and like the 9/11 attacks, the thousands that died did not have anything to do with there government's foreign policy. Did you find him Ossama Bin Ladden? No.
Does anybody, even the French, put forth that Saddam is not a madman, He is a madman, but please dont play the hollier than though card, not after you fundded him, not after you purposedly supplied him with knowledge and equipment to perform his madness. And if judged by the ammount of pain and grief he has inflicted, Bush is even madder than Hussein.
is he not highly interested in doing harm to the U.S.? yes, probably, along with many other countries and people who you have wadged war in the past. Are you going to bomb them all just because you are not popular among them?
I just worry that Iraq and its surrounding nations will propagandize this (as history shows they have before) and use it as a tool to create more, not less terrorism. Justified or not, it will still bring a lot of negative consequences when we win--maybe more than if we didn't do it at all. I totally agree with you in this point. Going to war is a no win scenario for the US and Iraq in the long run. Like it or not, the root of US directed terrorism is the past US foreign policy. Want to stop terrorism? Change your foreign policy.
Bullshit, lets start with the basics: weapons and explosives. Which person provides the most support: the one who sells them an 5 Kgs of C4 or the one who turns on their heat during winter? How come you are willing to boycot the people who sell oil and not say a word against the people who the very means terrorists use? Is it because the people who sell weapons are not arabs? Or is it because selling weapons to foreign countries is a major source of income to US business?
And guess what, neither of the two measures (boycotting oil or weapons) will probably serve in the long run. To solve this problem you need to attack its source, which has been for the last 50 years, US foreign policies.
Slashdot Mirror
What's the first question you ask yourself when you see a user that is doing something that could have been prevented with lockdown?
For me it is, what kind of "additional features" will the installed programs cary? What kind of malware will I have to remove from the machine? Or is this program leaking out data through the web/mail interface.
Locking out users is not done just out of sheer fun. Fixing machines broken my 3rd party programs does have a cost. Sadly most of the time I have to deal with this kind of programs, it will be because the user has installed some porn shit. Very, very few programs would actually increase creativity on the user's behalf.
Next you will be telling us that the slaves were really happier before the Civil War.
Probably not, but who the fuck is talking about the slaves here? You were questioned if you ever lived under any of the regimes you despised or through a war you seem so eager to cast on other people's country.
It's not like anyone would really want to risk their lives for freedom - right?
People risk their lifes for freedom. True revolutions are made by the people, not by some foreign invading army. Take a look at the Perestroika, Rumanina or Yugoslavian revolution. Compare them to current situation in Bosnia or Afghanistan.
The sooner the Americans stop seeing themselves as world police, the sooner the rest of the world will start to get along with you. Grow up, wise up, and by Pete's sake, get the crazy cowboy out of the White House.
Living your life under Stalin, Kim of North Korea, Castro, Saddam Hussein is worse than war
Not that I support any of this people; but how would you know about this? Have you ever lived under any of this regimes? Have you ever had to face the crudeness of a war?
ISO 9000 does not specify backups separated by more than xxxx meters. They only ask that your quality registries are filed, retrivable and do not degrade over the course of time. It is the organization setting up their quality systems that define how and where are these registries going to be stored (and if necesary backed up).
Of course, if you keep these registries on IT infrastructure, the smart thing to do would be to back them up off site.
Dont worry about it... my users do this too, I guess I could conclude that stupidity is universal.
There is one option that you could consider. Enabling roaming profiles. Profiles not only save their windows themes, but also the content of "My Documents" to the server every time the users log out.
Bounces them / doesn't accept them. The end result to the author of the denied message will still look the same, except maybe one will be delayed for a couple of hours.
I've set up exim to ignore all incoming SMTP calls from dsl hosts (*.dsl.*) and also to block hosts without proper reverse-DNS.
Good for you, I hope you also told your users that you might be bouncing 70% (according to AOL figures) of legitimate email, just because the sender's postmaster chose not to follow your unpublished standard. If you didn't, then by all means start reherseaing excuses to tell your users (and some of them do get angry) regarding their bounced mail.
Whenever I get bounces from sys admins such as yourself I basically fax the original message, bounce notice, along a note suggesting the end user to change their ISP.
Back in the days where dedicated high speed Internet access was for the rich, a client of us was testing a web based data capture form. The contractor developing the web based had blundered the designed (or maybe had miscalculated the times required to fetch data from DBMS) and to cover up their tracks they told our customer that the new system would require "broadband access" to the Internet.
No problem, when the sales department came to me, I told them that according to V.35 our connection to the Internet was an effective broadband type and that they could put that into our proposal. Nobody in the other end complained, the new system (along with the contractor) eventally got sacked and we ended up burning CDs and transfering them to our client like we always had.
If your father nags you because of your grades, use of dangerous drugs or driving under the influence of alcohol, I don't posibly see how he is imposing on you his life model.
Just go ahead and try learning based on trail and error on any of the before mentioned subjects.
And, thus, the child's experience might be limited to the parent's own experience.
Come on now, are you trying to tell us that you got more experience in life than your father can posibly have? You can probably show your father a lot of things, but you will never show him how to make babies.
The school's perception of the truth isn't always correct or even needed.
I agree with the "correct" part, but definetly not with the "needed". Your folks are some way or another paying for school. They are entitled to a report from it. You don't like the rules, then move out of your house and try giving a shot to real life. You will find that not every thing there is to learn about life you can learn on your own. Further more, you will find that society will only give you access to certain oportunities based on your academic history.
NT
"User in office 12a keeps unplugging the switch so he can make coffee" type comments
You are in desperate need of a cattleprod among your tools then. Check the BOFH shop for the apropiate voltage requirements.Trouble with ditching IE even to favor Mozilla/Opera/Netscape is the fact that some banks/sites favor IE and won't support Netscape/Mozilla. Some sites won't even function properly with Netscape/Mozilla/Opera.
The last thing I want is the folks I support complaining they can't see a page. I just really hate user support. I hate it, I hate it.
I would also add:
1. A copy of a decent AV. Norton/Mcafee basically suck with its new business model, I am sick and tired of cleaning up machines with expired AVs. The people from Grisoft make free nonexpiring AVs for noncomercial use.
2. Lavasoft Adaware is also a vital component. So much malware is responsible for irresponsive/crashy machines, I could set a business just selling copies of this and recovering machines.
3. The long list of SPs and QFs for Win98 and IE. Actually I am begining to ponder wether to start ditching IE and OE on the new machines I see in favor of Netscape.
He probably meant a server with frontpage server extensions configured. No SMB is required to do this. Check out this link.
But frontpage is also available for unix, so the web server really does not make a difference.
No, no... he meant invasion.
Like the one in Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Panama, Chile (oh, just to name a few). Afterwards, just set up a puppet (think about the french, polish, austrian post-german-invasion governments since you seem to be well versed in WWII). Shall the puppet become hostile, shake and renew the process. Why maintain a fully productive army in an occupied country while it could be used to "liberate" other "oppressed" nations?
I live in Mexico City, and get my connection to Internet thourgh DSL. Unlike the US, the POTs infrastucture is not open to any ISP, so either you sign up with the national telephone company, or you are stuck with dail up.
Of course, as it usually turns out to be in this kind of scenario, the clueless designers in the telephone company have lumped residential (dynamic IP) with business (fixed IP) DSL (and yes, I have notified them about this), thus leaving many business in the dark when it comes to bounces.
My point is, sometimes you just do not have an option. Choosing to bounce just because the sender can't invest on a dedicated link is rather snobistic.
I'm not convinced that it's unfair to say that to a business DSL customer either, although I understand how they would like to be able to send mail directly instead of smarthosting through their provider.
I am sorry, but you are nobody to tell other admins how to run their system. If you want to block business DSLs, then start rehersing excuses to tell your users when they complain that legit business mail is being blocked by you. Sending mail through many ISPs SMTP servers is usually a nightmare. In my case, they impose strange restrictions on the message return address and attachment max sizes. Whenever I get a bounce suggesting that I am on DSL, I just fax the message to the user along with the bounce and a note suggesting him to change ISPs.
only people using NT are businesses that are reluctant or unable to upgrade.
Je, I remember too when I was a student and thought that to upgrade software all you needed was to buy the thing and then run a wizard.
Unfortunately, this is not the case for most systems. Upgrading takes much time and puts strain on IT staff to get the monster running on schedule. Last time I upgraded the CEO of the company walked in on me during a sunday to see if the systems would be ready to run on Monday. Must I say more?
Please let me know what, from a business point of view, a mainframe can't do that a Solaris (or *laughs sarcastically* a Windows) box can?
Mainframes are in a different league, when it comes to reliablity, scalability and raw transaction power. Take a look at this article.
While the poster might laugh it up, there are millions of bucks invested in COBOL code, and none of the owners are eager to hear on trashing their systems and rewritting things up.
I am however puzzled over one simple fact; can it really be legal in the USofA (where I presume this is happening) to sell such a device? Over here (Norway for those who don't get the clue from my nick) it would be quite illegal to sell something which is intended to allow the (l)user to break the law.
It probably ain't; this would be a legitimate target of the DMCA, but since the cable operators are getting rich with this device, I am certian they are not considering taking this affair to court.
Je... they probably are secretly financing the guy who developed this con
There is nothing complex about the truth. You funded this man and now that he does not fit in your political agenda, you want him out. You did the same in Panama and in Chile. No theories involved here, just the facts.
But forget about the funding, the double morale of the US lies in the fact that you sold, assisted and even ignored his use of WMD during the 80s. Why didn't you just sold him conventional weapons back then? Or did your government thought he was just going to assemble a biology research lab?
How do you expect any support from the world when you have been directly involved in the creation and empowerment of this madman? Shouldn't the world be imposing sanctions on the US for providing him with the means for doing such a thing?
And since you are turning on France for making money out of Iraq, why don't you take your terrrorism problems up with Saudi Arabia? Or is it he fact the Saudi Arabia provides you with your much needed oil has to do anything with this? After all, Saudi Arabia has been a much more involved country when it comes to financing and supporting terrorism than Iraq.
I believe a US-led war on Iraq is entirely justified
Is this because of all the technology/weapons of mass destruction the US helped him aquire? Maybe Bush should take this up with his daddy and leave the world alone. Why doesn't the US present this as the much seeked proof of WMD in Iraq?
After one madman bent on your destruction is *not* attacked, and then kills thousands of innocent Americans, it is perfectly justified to seek out other madmen bent on your destruction.
You did attack Al-Qaeda and Ossama Bin Ladden. It was your excuse for bombing Afghanistan. Thousands died in your showoff, and like the 9/11 attacks, the thousands that died did not have anything to do with there government's foreign policy. Did you find him Ossama Bin Ladden? No.
Does anybody, even the French, put forth that Saddam is not a madman,
He is a madman, but please dont play the hollier than though card, not after you fundded him, not after you purposedly supplied him with knowledge and equipment to perform his madness. And if judged by the ammount of pain and grief he has inflicted, Bush is even madder than Hussein.
is he not highly interested in doing harm to the U.S.?
yes, probably, along with many other countries and people who you have wadged war in the past. Are you going to bomb them all just because you are not popular among them?
I just worry that Iraq and its surrounding nations will propagandize this (as history shows they have before) and use it as a tool to create more, not less terrorism. Justified or not, it will still bring a lot of negative consequences when we win--maybe more than if we didn't do it at all.
I totally agree with you in this point. Going to war is a no win scenario for the US and Iraq in the long run. Like it or not, the root of US directed terrorism is the past US foreign policy. Want to stop terrorism? Change your foreign policy.
Oil? Being critical? Driving a van? Copying a CD?
Bullshit, lets start with the basics: weapons and explosives. Which person provides the most support: the one who sells them an 5 Kgs of C4 or the one who turns on their heat during winter? How come you are willing to boycot the people who sell oil and not say a word against the people who the very means terrorists use? Is it because the people who sell weapons are not arabs? Or is it because selling weapons to foreign countries is a major source of income to US business?
And guess what, neither of the two measures (boycotting oil or weapons) will probably serve in the long run. To solve this problem you need to attack its source, which has been for the last 50 years, US foreign policies.